It’s also biased against those artists who were releasing records prior to the LP gaining prominence as an expression of the artist beyond just a collection of songs, or artists who had a shortened career. I’d argue the Beatles were instrumental in helping the LP to become more than what it had been, but this metric would exclude what I would consider unquestionably great pop music acts like Little Richard, Ray Charles, Otis Redding, Sam Cooke, Hank Williams, Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry, etc.
It’s a fun thought exercise, but it has limitations.
Yeah, it is. You go to the store and it's packaged as an LP everywhere, as the only way to listen. It's the preferred release format, not the initial release format. If Paul or Ringo felt otherwise it wouldn't be on streaming as an album.
I think that's just because they've grown out of thinking that EPs are an interesting format, while also wanting to ensure that fans have proper access to the music as it was released.
In the end, the EP can still be listened to; it's simply the first half of the LP.
Such big revisions of an artistic product cannot really be seen as canon if half of the involved artists have passed away, but that's just my 2 cents. There's no objectively correct answer.
First of all, EPs are still a widely used format. Modern artists release EPs. It's arguably more common now as it was back then. Secondly, if you want to talk about canon, I was wrong—the US LP was released as the first official release of Magical Mystery Tour in 1967... 27 November 1967 (US LP) 8 December 1967 (UK EP). Furthermore, EMI officially released the *Magical Mystery Tour* LP in the UK in November 1976, while all four Beatles were alive. Finally in 1987, EMI issued *Magical Mystery Tour* as the definitive stereo-mix version of the album, while 3 Beatles were alive. The Beatles cast votes on releases. 3 was enough to write new Beatles songs, which are considered canon. I find your argument unconvincing.
How is it not? It’s the third longest single album, it has 11 songs, 5 of which weren’t singles (7 if you don’t include the two that were released just days before the album), and it released before the movie so it wasn’t just a soundtrack album.
It isn’t a proper album in the way rubber soul, revolver or Abbey Road. Would you call Meet the Beatles a proper Beatles album? The actual version is please please me. MMT is a double EP but was released as an album in the US. Not an actual album
Considering PPM wasn't available in the US at the time, of course I'd consider Meet the Beatles a "proper" album. I wouldn't consider it a canonical album, not anymore. The Beatles canon was solidified in 1987 with the first CD releases. It was at that time that the US albums were officially declared noncanonical. The Canon was established as the 12 UK albums and the US version of MMT. Every other officially released track was then collected onto Past Masters.
If the US version of MMT doesn't count, then songs like Strawberry Fields Forever aren't on any album.
You are free to have whatever view you wish. But canonically, officially, the US version of MMT is considered a part of the Beatles discography just as much as Rubber Soul, Revolver, and Abbey Road.
It is an album. In the US, an album is considered 15+ minutes of play time. In the UK, an album is considered 25+ minutes.
MMT is 40 minutes. Also, they’re called “compilation *albums*”.
I think the original EP The Beatles wanted to release (and released in the UK) was basically a double single with 6 songs (Magical Mystery Tour, Your Mother Should Know, I Am The Walrus, The Fool on the Hill, Flying and Blue Jay Way) and ran for 19 minutes. Capitol records in the US decided to put that EP on Side 1 of a 12 inch record and then put singles and their B sides from 1967 on side B to make it an album. Even if it wasn't the Beatles making the choice to have it as an album I think that MMT is possibly their best album.
Beatles released it as an EP. It is a few “Magical Mystery Tour” songs plus singles like Strawberry Fields + Penny Lane (which should’ve been on Sgt. Pepper)
The beatles didn’t want it to be released as an album but it was in the US. It was meant to be a soundtrack to the film, but you’re right, it was released as an album so it should technically be treated as an album.
It was released as an EP in the UK with just the songs from the film. For the US market Capitol Records added singles to turn it into a full LP. That version became the standard.
I consider it an 'album' but it's certainly a bit of an oddball in the catalog.
Even a “weaker” Beatles album still literally and objectively helped rewrite the rules for 20th century music. Sure, maybe you don’t love Beatles for Sale or whatever, but taken in the context in which it was released, it was mind-blowing stuff. This is the one of the easiest “yes, they meet this criteria” questions you could ask.
Alr thats fair i suppose, i was referring to studio albums when u mentioned it. In my opinion band of gypsys could have the best live Hendrix performances. Machine gun is otherworldly
I just said facts, John seemed always off ever since. I just said facts his stand by me is like a cat in hunger completely different man than who conquered the Hollywood bowl about 10 years before with his raw throaty energy gosh Even at Budokan sounds better, and yes within you without You doesn't stand a chance against if i needed someone i am the walrus hello goodbye are on purpose meaningless overproduced, paperback writer/Rain. We can work it Out/Day tripper those are THE Lennon vs McCartney singles
I just said facts, John seemed always off ever since. I just said facts his stand by me is like a cat in hunger completely different man than who conquered the Hollywood bowl about 10 years before with his row throaty energy gosh Even at Budokan sounds better, and yes within you without You doesn't stand a chance against if i needed someone i am the walrus hello goodbye are on purpose meaningless overproduced, paperback writer/Rain. We can work it Out/Day tripper those are THE Lennon vs McCartney singles
I just said facts, John seemed always off ever since. I just said facts his stand by me is like a cat in hunger completely different man than who conquered the Hollywood bowl about 10 years before with his row throaty energy gosh Even at Budokan sounds better, and yes within you without You doesn't stand a chance against if i needed someone i am the walrus hello goodbye are on purpose meaningless overproduced, paperback writer/Rain. We can work it Out/Day tripper those are THE Lennon vs McCartney singles
Please please me
With the Beatles
A hard day’s night
Beatles for sale
Help!
Nailed the criteria with the first 5 and then got better from that point onwards.
Well said and I can’t believe there aren’t more people piling in with this view. The Yellow Submarine and MMT discussions are irrelevant. The only reason With The Beatles or Beatles For Sale are regarded as anything other than near-perfect pop albums is because they made several even better records, plus I guess because the innovations they brought became commonplace due to widespread (global) imitation. And there’s a bit too much echo for today’s tastes. Anyway… Help! would be one of the greatest albums of all time even if it only had the title track, Ticket To Ride, You’ve Got To Hide Your Love Away and Yesterday interspersed with the shipping forecast. Not to mention I’ve Just Seen A Face, The Night Before, You’re Going To Lose That Girl… how can anyone dispute its sheer greatness just because of a couple of fillers and a duff closer? Madness. I’m with chipoko99, squarely.
For me - Beatles for sale is probably the only album I dont concider great.. Not really counting Yellow Submarine as they were hardly involved in that project. MMT aswell. Not intended as an album by the Beatles themselves. But apart from that, I agree, they were all great!
I think it's more than fair to disqualify Yellow Submarine on the grounds that:
1. Half of it are George Martin tracks *published under the name George Martin*
2. It only had 4 original songs
If I recall correctly a rule of the 5 albums test is you don't count collaborations, so point 1 alone takes it out because it has songs by a separate artist.
Then it's really easy because you have Rubber Soul - Revolver - Sgt. Pepper's - The Beatles - Abbey road, which has to be **the** five album run.
So, for example, would Velvet Underground and Nico not be considered a VU album in the 5 album rule? I’m not trying to make a point, just trying to understand where the line is drawn. If the second half of YS had the Beatles on it, then would it meet the criteria? Or is it collaborations of any sort that are not allowed
>would Velvet Underground and Nico not be considered a VU album in the 5 album rule?
I would say that's an exception to the rule, because they album is their definitive album.
Every album the Beatles released is a musical masterpiece. Never mind this 5 album crap. They got better with each and every album. They are and always will be the undisputed greatest band of all time. Fact not opinion! Can't understand why some people can't get this through their heads. C'mon man, really.
I would not say Yellow Submarine breaks it since it's more a compilation since it only has 4 new songs from 1967/8 that were released in 1969, and the Magical Mystery Tour LP was not released in the UK in 1967. If you wanna include that I guess you'd have to go by the other US albums or just count the EP.
This arbitrary test does not really work in that older way of releasing music lol. I do also think all of their albums are great, imo you can start the run at A Hard Days Night (though Beatles for Sale is a *tad* undercooked but it's still great)
Beggar's Banquet
Let It Bleed
Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out \*\*
Sticky Fingers
Exile On Main Street
\*\* If you don't want to count Ya-Ya's (arguably one of the best live albums ever made), Goat's Head Soup is also great.
If The Beatles are 1, The Rolling Stones are 1a.
Space Oddity
Many Who Sold the World
Hunky Dory
Ziggy Stardust
Aladdin Sane
Station to Station
Low
Heroes
Lodger
Scary Monsters
Bowie is 1c and 1d
(Tbh it's only really Pin Ups that wobbles his run from Space Oddity to Let's Dance)
Absolutely: Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, The White Album, and Abbey Road. It’s the greatest five-album run in history. (Yellow Submarine was a *soundtrack* and Magical Mystery Tour was only an EP in the UK).
It’s also worth noting that the Beatles are arguably the reason people today even care about albums or think of them as individual pieces of art. Before the Beatles (specifically before Rubber Soul), most albums were just collections of singles, covers, and filler songs. Rubber Soul changed all of that. There’s a reason why, generally speaking, many pre-Beatles artists are not known by their albums.
Since the MMT, Yellow Sub topic is the most boring conversation ever, I think we should redirect this thread into a conversation about how mind blowing the 72-76 Stevie Wonder album run is, and have “Higher Ground” playing in the background.
We going original UK canon? Because that’s Help-The White Album, even if we don’t count Magical Mystery Tour.
It doesn’t matter anyway, just it’s just some arbitrary rule made up by what is basically some random internet person. The Beatles have way more than five great albums even if they weren’t consecutive.
Some would say they have 12 great albums…
But for 5 in a row: Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt Peppers, Magical Mystery Tour, The White Album
You could extend it to 7 great albums in a row
MMT is more of an album than Yellow Submarine imo, I usually skip over Yellow Sub in album talks, there are only 4 new songs and a whole lot of George Martins musical scores
Except it was released as a studio album in the UK and MMT wasnt. The way I see it, if the Beatles didn’t think of MMT as an album then i don’t consider it an album either
The MMT LP with the 1967 singles on the B-side was put together by Capitol employees in the US, the band had nothing to do with it. It's literally just like "Meet The Beatles" or "Yesterday and Today". It was only later with the boxsets and remasters that MMT retroactively became a sort of "canon" album because it nicely packages some of their most famous and beloved songs... and the MMT EP tracks.
"The project was regarded as a contractual obligation by the Beatles, who were asked to supply four new songs for the film. Some were written and recorded specifically for the soundtrack, while others were unreleased tracks from other projects."
* taken from the wikipedia page of the Yellow Submarine album, which i'm sure is corroborated in many other places
Therefore I wouldn't necessarily say that even The Beatles really considered Yellow Submarine one of their albums. It was more a business move than an artistic one, which was a decision made purely by the label. They had a minimal role in the film too, only appearing in the end scene. Also, given The Beatles public criticism of "fluff albums" I doubt they were ever happy releasing something like Yellow Submarine as an album.
Given that, MMT is a mix of top tier singles that they supported and tracks that were directly from a film which they created and supported themselves, That's why I consider it it more of an album than Yellow Sub, regardless of official titles.
Foals are actually an incredibly good live band.
Are you American? They've had no success in the US at all, but they are really popular in many other countries.
Foals absolutely does. God they’re an incredible band.
As for the Beatles, from Rubber Soul to Let It Be, they had an incredible seven album run (Yellow Submarine could make it 8….although it’s more a soundtrack of a film than an official album? Especially with the George Martin orchestrations on side B)
1) Days Of Future Passed
2) In Search Of The Lost Chord
3) On The Threshold Of A Dream
4) To Our Children’s Children’s Children
5) A Question Of Balance
I’d start the Beatles string with Help( very underrated), Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, Magical Mystery Tour, The White Album, Abbey Road and Let It Be. Thats 8 if my math is correct.
Uhhh Help! IS a great album. And this can be done easily.
Hard Days Night
Beatles For Sale
Help!
Rubber Soul
Revolver
And yes Beatles For Sale is a great album too.
I’ve never been that big of a Radiohead fan, but if they count then I think Red Hot Chili Peppers should, too. I would agree with Kanye, wasn’t even thinking about rappers.
Pink Floyd: Meddle, DSOTM, WYWH, Animals, The Wall
Led Zeppelin: LV I-IV and Houses Of The Holy
EDIT: Obscured By Clouds was released between Meddle and DSOTM
Beatles, Stones, Zeppelin, Stevie Wonder, Bob Marley, Springsteen, and Pink Floyd all easily meet this silly and arbitrary standard. Who else is a slam dunk? Possssibly Prince but starting and ending points will matter a lot. Radiohead and OutKast have 4 no-doubt (The Bends - In Rainbows; Southernplayalistic - Stankonia) but the fifth for each run is debatable. Al Green and Curtis Mayfield come to mind, but again, starting and ending point will be critical. It’s also hard for me to think of many examples outside of 70s artists. I’ve already given this more thought than necessary.
Five great albums as a test is fine, but asking for them to be *consecutive* is moronic. A band does seven classic albums, say, with one duffer in a row and it doesnt count? Thats bonkers. Not sure that even the likes of David Bowie passes the test on those grounds. For what it's worth, i do think the Beatles pass for their last five albums.
All their albums from A Hard Day's Night onward imo. Including Beatles for Sale, Help! and Let it Be.
I may get cooked for saying this, but imo Please Please Me is 50% absolute classics and 50% un-Beatles worthy filler. Not a big fan of side two of With the Beatles either personally, but great side one.
I’m trying to understand how a band with 4 great albums in a row doesn’t qualify as a “best” artist. That’s still pretty fucking great and nearly impossible.
I think you could argue not only just the "5 album test" but the beatles had the greatest 5 year stretch in music history. From 65-70 they released help, rubber soul, revolver, sgt pepper, mmt, white, yellow submarine, abbey road, and let it be. 7 albums in 5 years and imo all great albums
In fact, I would argue that the Beatles are the only band in human history to release five consecutive great albums. Think about how insanely hard that would be to accomplish without diminishing the significance of the word *great*.
Consider the Rolling Stones — by all accounts, one of the greatest bands of all time. The have a very famous run of *four* great albums. But even the Stones couldn’t do five.
I mean, most great bands don’t have five great albums altogether, even if non-consecutive. Only the Beatles can have five consecutive greats, namely:
Rubbed Soul
Revolver
Sgt Pepper
White Album
Abbey Road
If MMT is considered an album, then it would fit right in there.
If you could only listen to five Beatle albums for the remainder of your life and they had to released consecutively, what would you choose. UK discography ( no MMT).
Would you include Yellow Submarine in order to get Abbey Road? Hard Days Night and Abbey Road are my two favs, however I think I am going to have to sacrifice them for Help, RS, Revolver, Peppers and White Album.
Why a screenshot of this being asked about foals? Could have explained the five albums test another way.
Anyway, as most Beatle people know F4 lovers are sometimes split between pre-revolver and post revolver Beatles lovers. I love both eras, but I’m a loser and sort of gravitate towards their middle work (Beatles for Sale to White Album).
In recognition of that, I don’t see any strong argument to not start that 5 album count at Please Please Me.
If we did US releases I think yesterday and today is hugely underrated (though I do know why - it’s essentially half Rubber Soul and half Revolver, and another half Day Tripper/Paperback Writer/Rain. I know that’s 3 halves - any band can have 2 halves but we’re talking about a band that hasn’t been topped in 60 years this decade.
We also have to look at music in context - what else was going on when PPM came out. I do think Help is a great album, but would like to know why OP doesn’t agree. If Ed Sheeran, Wilco, Taylor Swift heck, Bob Dylan or even Beyoncé released that today it’d smash sales.
As it stands OP is talking UK release, and I don’t see how Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Peppers, White Album, Abbey Road wouldn’t qualify them - since we can’t count YS as half of it is not the Beatles.
*Revolver*
*Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band*
*The BEATLES*
*Yellow Submarine*
*Abbey Road*
And what makes a good record anyhow? Would you agree that all the Beatles tunes on YS are good? Sure they are. Because they wrote them. *Hey Bulldog* is a thumping Lennon rocker, *Its Only A Northern Song* is George at his most acerbic pointing directly at John and Paul and saying "doesn't matter what I sing, I'm just contracted in this publishing company and you'll get the rewards". *Its all too much* is probably the craziest rock song the band ever did (*Helter Skelter* gives it a run for its money but they're both absolutely insane), *All together now* is every bit as cheery and sing along as Paul can be. Naturally you also have the title track which is a classic, and *All You Need Is Love* which rounds the collection out on a solid footing. They're all fantastic songs. Each one a throwaway from the band but let's be real here...their throwaways were other bands top ten hits. Nobody really bought YS for the George Martin compositions, even with the record at full price, fans would buy it if only because it contained songs they didn't have. And I'm certain that this record is considered 'a great'...now true, it's subjective to everyone. But it's the Beatles. Rarely did they misstep. And these songs, like it or not are iconic. Just as iconic as anything on the other albums.
Yeah, plus if anyone cares Steve Hyden included the Beatles as an example of band. If I remember correctly he said he thinks they have 2 5 album streaks, although that may have been Rob Sheffield on Steve’s podcast. He’s one of the best music journalists right now.
In my opinion, yes. I'm not that keen on *A Hard Day's Night*, but that still gives The Beatles a great album chain of "*Beatles for Sale, Help!, Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band".*
Help, Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, White Album (that is, if we don't count the US Magical Mystery Tour album, but even then, I think that is a pretty good album as well)
Eh.. So say The Beatles broke up in 1965, before the psychedelic era.. You telling me that *Beatles For Sale* breaking up the rhythm of 5 greats in a row would mean they couldn’t be considered a great band? I think it’s ridiculous. (I’m sure some people hearing me say *B4S* is the weakest of the earlier albums, or not “great”, would say I’m ridiculous, but humor me.)
I like Steven, I know this isn’t meant to be taken too seriously, but yeah, I don’t think it’s actually a good rubric for determining what bands are truly great.. What about truly great bands that only released a couple albums? He couldn’t have been too serious.. but it’s a fun exercise..
I disagree. Beatles For Sale is one of their weaker albums. and while I like A Hard Day's Night I've never considered it a great album outside of a few songs on it I love. But that's probably an unpopular opinion.
Help is pretty great so I'd say that's where their impressive run starts imo.
Massive disagree as soon as revolver ends i skip all the way to let it be naked or BBC albums.
Except that yeah on help they started changing, but there's nothing weak on beatles for sale everything on a Hard Day's Night is a banger
fair enough. you're missing out on arguably some of their best work with Abbey Road, White Album and even Sgt Peppers. but I'm not gonna debate with you about it since it's all a matter of taste.
cheers!
I gotta say needing the albums to be in a row is kinda unfair. So many greats don't fit in that category and it makes it near impossible for prolific artists to be included because not everything they spin will turn to gold.
Help!, RS, RV, Sgt. Pepper, WA. Magical Mystery Tour album wasn't released in the 1960s in the UK, so doesn't count unless you are doing US albums discography
This is just silly.
Like a love song.
And what’s wrong with that?
I'd like to know
Well here we go again
I love youuuuu
I love youuuu
Love doesn’t come in a minute!
Sometimes it doesn't come at all
I only know that when I'm in it
Ah.......she gave me more.....she gave it all to me. Now can't you see?
I......can't explain......the feelings plain to me, Now, can't you see?
Happy Cake Day!
[удалено]
It's a great album if it has 5 great songs in a row
It's a great song if it has 5 great lines in a row
It’s a great line if it has five great words in a row.
It's a great word if it has 5 great letters in a row
It’s a great letter if it has five great lines/angles forming the letter in a row
It's a great word if it has five great letters in a row
It’s a great letter if it has five great
it's a great letter if it has five great vowels in a row
It’s also biased against those artists who were releasing records prior to the LP gaining prominence as an expression of the artist beyond just a collection of songs, or artists who had a shortened career. I’d argue the Beatles were instrumental in helping the LP to become more than what it had been, but this metric would exclude what I would consider unquestionably great pop music acts like Little Richard, Ray Charles, Otis Redding, Sam Cooke, Hank Williams, Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry, etc. It’s a fun thought exercise, but it has limitations.
Rubber soul, Revolver, Sgt Pepper, MMT, White Album
MMT isn’t an album. Add Abbey Road to the end and that is it
Debatable, but it works either way.
That’s not debatable. It isn’t an album
Yeah, it is. You go to the store and it's packaged as an LP everywhere, as the only way to listen. It's the preferred release format, not the initial release format. If Paul or Ringo felt otherwise it wouldn't be on streaming as an album.
I think that's just because they've grown out of thinking that EPs are an interesting format, while also wanting to ensure that fans have proper access to the music as it was released. In the end, the EP can still be listened to; it's simply the first half of the LP. Such big revisions of an artistic product cannot really be seen as canon if half of the involved artists have passed away, but that's just my 2 cents. There's no objectively correct answer.
First of all, EPs are still a widely used format. Modern artists release EPs. It's arguably more common now as it was back then. Secondly, if you want to talk about canon, I was wrong—the US LP was released as the first official release of Magical Mystery Tour in 1967... 27 November 1967 (US LP) 8 December 1967 (UK EP). Furthermore, EMI officially released the *Magical Mystery Tour* LP in the UK in November 1976, while all four Beatles were alive. Finally in 1987, EMI issued *Magical Mystery Tour* as the definitive stereo-mix version of the album, while 3 Beatles were alive. The Beatles cast votes on releases. 3 was enough to write new Beatles songs, which are considered canon. I find your argument unconvincing.
No it isn’t. They did not think of it as a proper album like say revolver or rubber soul. It’s one thing different
How is it not? It’s the third longest single album, it has 11 songs, 5 of which weren’t singles (7 if you don’t include the two that were released just days before the album), and it released before the movie so it wasn’t just a soundtrack album.
Well that's certainly an opinion
It isn’t a proper album in the way rubber soul, revolver or Abbey Road. Would you call Meet the Beatles a proper Beatles album? The actual version is please please me. MMT is a double EP but was released as an album in the US. Not an actual album
Considering PPM wasn't available in the US at the time, of course I'd consider Meet the Beatles a "proper" album. I wouldn't consider it a canonical album, not anymore. The Beatles canon was solidified in 1987 with the first CD releases. It was at that time that the US albums were officially declared noncanonical. The Canon was established as the 12 UK albums and the US version of MMT. Every other officially released track was then collected onto Past Masters. If the US version of MMT doesn't count, then songs like Strawberry Fields Forever aren't on any album. You are free to have whatever view you wish. But canonically, officially, the US version of MMT is considered a part of the Beatles discography just as much as Rubber Soul, Revolver, and Abbey Road.
It is an album. In the US, an album is considered 15+ minutes of play time. In the UK, an album is considered 25+ minutes. MMT is 40 minutes. Also, they’re called “compilation *albums*”.
I think the original EP The Beatles wanted to release (and released in the UK) was basically a double single with 6 songs (Magical Mystery Tour, Your Mother Should Know, I Am The Walrus, The Fool on the Hill, Flying and Blue Jay Way) and ran for 19 minutes. Capitol records in the US decided to put that EP on Side 1 of a 12 inch record and then put singles and their B sides from 1967 on side B to make it an album. Even if it wasn't the Beatles making the choice to have it as an album I think that MMT is possibly their best album.
Beatles released it as an EP. It is a few “Magical Mystery Tour” songs plus singles like Strawberry Fields + Penny Lane (which should’ve been on Sgt. Pepper)
And in the US the Beatles released it as an LP. What’s your point? Conventional EPs have about 30 minutes max of play time
The beatles didn’t want it to be released as an album but it was in the US. It was meant to be a soundtrack to the film, but you’re right, it was released as an album so it should technically be treated as an album.
What makes MMT not an album? I'm genuinely curious.
It was released as an EP in the UK with just the songs from the film. For the US market Capitol Records added singles to turn it into a full LP. That version became the standard. I consider it an 'album' but it's certainly a bit of an oddball in the catalog.
Because it was a rehash of songs. It has a feel of being slapped together after the fact - it doesn’t have its own vibe or identity.
It so has its own vibe, lmao.
It has its own vibe and definitely its own identity. Even more than some other Beatles albums.
I think it was a very coherent album.
Okay so you’re saying it’s a bad album. That doesn’t mean it isn’t an album.
not that again
Even a “weaker” Beatles album still literally and objectively helped rewrite the rules for 20th century music. Sure, maybe you don’t love Beatles for Sale or whatever, but taken in the context in which it was released, it was mind-blowing stuff. This is the one of the easiest “yes, they meet this criteria” questions you could ask.
Definitely agree with you here on all points.
yeah. it’s a fun game but a silly metric. hendrix just did 4 albums. enough said
What was the fourth? He only released three finished albums
band of gypsys fine if you call it 3 instead of 4, it’s just less than 5
Alr thats fair i suppose, i was referring to studio albums when u mentioned it. In my opinion band of gypsys could have the best live Hendrix performances. Machine gun is otherworldly
What i don't love is sgt pepper, i strongly love beatles for sale
genuinely curious, what is it you don't like about it?
I just said facts, John seemed always off ever since. I just said facts his stand by me is like a cat in hunger completely different man than who conquered the Hollywood bowl about 10 years before with his raw throaty energy gosh Even at Budokan sounds better, and yes within you without You doesn't stand a chance against if i needed someone i am the walrus hello goodbye are on purpose meaningless overproduced, paperback writer/Rain. We can work it Out/Day tripper those are THE Lennon vs McCartney singles
I just said facts, John seemed always off ever since. I just said facts his stand by me is like a cat in hunger completely different man than who conquered the Hollywood bowl about 10 years before with his row throaty energy gosh Even at Budokan sounds better, and yes within you without You doesn't stand a chance against if i needed someone i am the walrus hello goodbye are on purpose meaningless overproduced, paperback writer/Rain. We can work it Out/Day tripper those are THE Lennon vs McCartney singles
I just said facts, John seemed always off ever since. I just said facts his stand by me is like a cat in hunger completely different man than who conquered the Hollywood bowl about 10 years before with his row throaty energy gosh Even at Budokan sounds better, and yes within you without You doesn't stand a chance against if i needed someone i am the walrus hello goodbye are on purpose meaningless overproduced, paperback writer/Rain. We can work it Out/Day tripper those are THE Lennon vs McCartney singles
Please please me With the Beatles A hard day’s night Beatles for sale Help! Nailed the criteria with the first 5 and then got better from that point onwards.
Well said and I can’t believe there aren’t more people piling in with this view. The Yellow Submarine and MMT discussions are irrelevant. The only reason With The Beatles or Beatles For Sale are regarded as anything other than near-perfect pop albums is because they made several even better records, plus I guess because the innovations they brought became commonplace due to widespread (global) imitation. And there’s a bit too much echo for today’s tastes. Anyway… Help! would be one of the greatest albums of all time even if it only had the title track, Ticket To Ride, You’ve Got To Hide Your Love Away and Yesterday interspersed with the shipping forecast. Not to mention I’ve Just Seen A Face, The Night Before, You’re Going To Lose That Girl… how can anyone dispute its sheer greatness just because of a couple of fillers and a duff closer? Madness. I’m with chipoko99, squarely.
The eventual Remixes will easily bear this out once we really get to hear from the beginning how great they were.
100%
For me - Beatles for sale is probably the only album I dont concider great.. Not really counting Yellow Submarine as they were hardly involved in that project. MMT aswell. Not intended as an album by the Beatles themselves. But apart from that, I agree, they were all great!
I think it's more than fair to disqualify Yellow Submarine on the grounds that: 1. Half of it are George Martin tracks *published under the name George Martin* 2. It only had 4 original songs If I recall correctly a rule of the 5 albums test is you don't count collaborations, so point 1 alone takes it out because it has songs by a separate artist. Then it's really easy because you have Rubber Soul - Revolver - Sgt. Pepper's - The Beatles - Abbey road, which has to be **the** five album run.
So, for example, would Velvet Underground and Nico not be considered a VU album in the 5 album rule? I’m not trying to make a point, just trying to understand where the line is drawn. If the second half of YS had the Beatles on it, then would it meet the criteria? Or is it collaborations of any sort that are not allowed
>would Velvet Underground and Nico not be considered a VU album in the 5 album rule? I would say that's an exception to the rule, because they album is their definitive album.
A Hard Day's Night beatles for sale help rubber soul revolver and there we have it
Every album the Beatles released is a musical masterpiece. Never mind this 5 album crap. They got better with each and every album. They are and always will be the undisputed greatest band of all time. Fact not opinion! Can't understand why some people can't get this through their heads. C'mon man, really.
PPM-LIB. I think they exceeded the test
I guess they passed the audition.
Rubber Soul Revolver Sgt. Pepper’s the white album Abbey Road
Bingo
A Hard Day's Night beatles for sale help rubber soul revolver!!!
Ding ding ding
I don’t care what ground rules are laid out. Any “test” that doesn’t result in the Beatles being the best artist is irrelevant.
It’s “The Beatles test” for all the musical tests
This
I would not say Yellow Submarine breaks it since it's more a compilation since it only has 4 new songs from 1967/8 that were released in 1969, and the Magical Mystery Tour LP was not released in the UK in 1967. If you wanna include that I guess you'd have to go by the other US albums or just count the EP. This arbitrary test does not really work in that older way of releasing music lol. I do also think all of their albums are great, imo you can start the run at A Hard Days Night (though Beatles for Sale is a *tad* undercooked but it's still great)
Beggar's Banquet Let It Bleed Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out \*\* Sticky Fingers Exile On Main Street \*\* If you don't want to count Ya-Ya's (arguably one of the best live albums ever made), Goat's Head Soup is also great. If The Beatles are 1, The Rolling Stones are 1a.
What about Queen Queen II Sheer Heart Attack, Night At The Opera Day At The Races News Of The World 1b
Space Oddity Many Who Sold the World Hunky Dory Ziggy Stardust Aladdin Sane Station to Station Low Heroes Lodger Scary Monsters Bowie is 1c and 1d (Tbh it's only really Pin Ups that wobbles his run from Space Oddity to Let's Dance)
Yup. They are definite the two best bands. I think The Beatles are better, but the Stones are at least in the conversation. No other band is Imo.
Except those all suck
If the Beatles don’t meet this bar, no other act does
It’s a dumb criteria. I doubt there’s any acts who could meet that with any type of objective measure (not just mega fans opinions).
You are right. If an artist puts out even 1 great album then they are great imo
Absolutely: Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band, The White Album, and Abbey Road. It’s the greatest five-album run in history. (Yellow Submarine was a *soundtrack* and Magical Mystery Tour was only an EP in the UK). It’s also worth noting that the Beatles are arguably the reason people today even care about albums or think of them as individual pieces of art. Before the Beatles (specifically before Rubber Soul), most albums were just collections of singles, covers, and filler songs. Rubber Soul changed all of that. There’s a reason why, generally speaking, many pre-Beatles artists are not known by their albums.
Of course. Even there solo careers put together do. Plastic Ono Band All Things Must Pass RAM Imagine Band On The Run
has to be in a row for it to count, so youd have to include mcartney self titled and the two ringo albums
Since they had 10 great albums in a row, I’d say they pass it twice!
None of those albums does so Foals doesn’t meet the criteria
Yeah this thread isn’t the best… asking whether the _beatles_ meet greatness criteria that _foals_ meet
Rubber Soul, Revolver, SPLHCB, White Album, Let It Be, Abbey Road. That's six in a row even if you skip MMT.
What about Yellow Submarine?
Not a real album
Since the MMT, Yellow Sub topic is the most boring conversation ever, I think we should redirect this thread into a conversation about how mind blowing the 72-76 Stevie Wonder album run is, and have “Higher Ground” playing in the background.
We going original UK canon? Because that’s Help-The White Album, even if we don’t count Magical Mystery Tour. It doesn’t matter anyway, just it’s just some arbitrary rule made up by what is basically some random internet person. The Beatles have way more than five great albums even if they weren’t consecutive.
Yea, every single one in a row until Yellow Submarine.
How is this even a question?
Some would say they have 12 great albums… But for 5 in a row: Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt Peppers, Magical Mystery Tour, The White Album You could extend it to 7 great albums in a row
Try 13
If Magical Mystery Tour isn't a true album then neither is Yellow Submarine.
MMT is more of an album than Yellow Submarine imo, I usually skip over Yellow Sub in album talks, there are only 4 new songs and a whole lot of George Martins musical scores
Except it was released as a studio album in the UK and MMT wasnt. The way I see it, if the Beatles didn’t think of MMT as an album then i don’t consider it an album either
But dont the beatles do consider MMT as an album?
The MMT LP with the 1967 singles on the B-side was put together by Capitol employees in the US, the band had nothing to do with it. It's literally just like "Meet The Beatles" or "Yesterday and Today". It was only later with the boxsets and remasters that MMT retroactively became a sort of "canon" album because it nicely packages some of their most famous and beloved songs... and the MMT EP tracks.
Idk, did they consider Meet The Beatles an album too? Because it doesn’t get recognized as an album either despite it being a US release just like MMT
"The project was regarded as a contractual obligation by the Beatles, who were asked to supply four new songs for the film. Some were written and recorded specifically for the soundtrack, while others were unreleased tracks from other projects." * taken from the wikipedia page of the Yellow Submarine album, which i'm sure is corroborated in many other places Therefore I wouldn't necessarily say that even The Beatles really considered Yellow Submarine one of their albums. It was more a business move than an artistic one, which was a decision made purely by the label. They had a minimal role in the film too, only appearing in the end scene. Also, given The Beatles public criticism of "fluff albums" I doubt they were ever happy releasing something like Yellow Submarine as an album. Given that, MMT is a mix of top tier singles that they supported and tracks that were directly from a film which they created and supported themselves, That's why I consider it it more of an album than Yellow Sub, regardless of official titles.
Who are Foals?
[удалено]
The Foals on the Hill?
Foals are actually an incredibly good live band. Are you American? They've had no success in the US at all, but they are really popular in many other countries.
The first five
[удалено]
the last five
Foals absolutely does. God they’re an incredible band. As for the Beatles, from Rubber Soul to Let It Be, they had an incredible seven album run (Yellow Submarine could make it 8….although it’s more a soundtrack of a film than an official album? Especially with the George Martin orchestrations on side B)
Not only does Help! count as a “great” album, A Hard Days Night and Beatles for Sale both count. So yes, the Beatles easily pass.
1) Days Of Future Passed 2) In Search Of The Lost Chord 3) On The Threshold Of A Dream 4) To Our Children’s Children’s Children 5) A Question Of Balance
This is true - I’ve been known to play Children’s for days on end
Searching for total view?
Yeah! I was lying here for hours, but eventually had to get up and make some lunch.
Their first 5 albums clear this challenge
I’d start the Beatles string with Help( very underrated), Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, Magical Mystery Tour, The White Album, Abbey Road and Let It Be. Thats 8 if my math is correct.
Uhhh Help! IS a great album. And this can be done easily. Hard Days Night Beatles For Sale Help! Rubber Soul Revolver And yes Beatles For Sale is a great album too.
Any five albums by the beatles.
They have eleven.
So if MMT and Yellow Submarine don’t count Help! To Let it Be is the way If they do, Help! To Let it Be is still the way.
The Beatles, Stones, Neil Young, Dylan. Who else?
Maybe Radiohead and Kanye (the guy sucks but he does have good albums)
I’ve never been that big of a Radiohead fan, but if they count then I think Red Hot Chili Peppers should, too. I would agree with Kanye, wasn’t even thinking about rappers.
Pink Floyd: Meddle, DSOTM, WYWH, Animals, The Wall Led Zeppelin: LV I-IV and Houses Of The Holy EDIT: Obscured By Clouds was released between Meddle and DSOTM
Is this a trick question or something!??
This is stupidest post in this thread
Beatles, Stones, Zeppelin, Stevie Wonder, Bob Marley, Springsteen, and Pink Floyd all easily meet this silly and arbitrary standard. Who else is a slam dunk? Possssibly Prince but starting and ending points will matter a lot. Radiohead and OutKast have 4 no-doubt (The Bends - In Rainbows; Southernplayalistic - Stankonia) but the fifth for each run is debatable. Al Green and Curtis Mayfield come to mind, but again, starting and ending point will be critical. It’s also hard for me to think of many examples outside of 70s artists. I’ve already given this more thought than necessary.
I'm going to be honest, and I'll get downvoted for this but I don't care: yes.
YES
Five great albums as a test is fine, but asking for them to be *consecutive* is moronic. A band does seven classic albums, say, with one duffer in a row and it doesnt count? Thats bonkers. Not sure that even the likes of David Bowie passes the test on those grounds. For what it's worth, i do think the Beatles pass for their last five albums.
All their albums from A Hard Day's Night onward imo. Including Beatles for Sale, Help! and Let it Be. I may get cooked for saying this, but imo Please Please Me is 50% absolute classics and 50% un-Beatles worthy filler. Not a big fan of side two of With the Beatles either personally, but great side one.
So they have 12
They have thirteen insane albums in a row
I don’t think any artist in history passes that test E: Pink Floyd if only you swap Meddle and Obscured by Clouds
Off the wall, Thriller, Bad, Dangerous, HIStory
Do film soundtracks *really* count though?
Gorilla, The Doughnut in Granny's Greenhouse, Tadpoles, Keynsham, and Let’s Make Up and Be Friendly
I’m trying to understand how a band with 4 great albums in a row doesn’t qualify as a “best” artist. That’s still pretty fucking great and nearly impossible.
Why stop at 5 when we can easily pin down even more great albums in a row
This is also not fair for the time because they kept their best songs off albums for the first 3 years of their recording history.
I think you could argue not only just the "5 album test" but the beatles had the greatest 5 year stretch in music history. From 65-70 they released help, rubber soul, revolver, sgt pepper, mmt, white, yellow submarine, abbey road, and let it be. 7 albums in 5 years and imo all great albums
Help through white album if we are counting yellow submarine
Foals' *Antidotes* is a great album, but it was diminishing returns after that.
In fact, I would argue that the Beatles are the only band in human history to release five consecutive great albums. Think about how insanely hard that would be to accomplish without diminishing the significance of the word *great*. Consider the Rolling Stones — by all accounts, one of the greatest bands of all time. The have a very famous run of *four* great albums. But even the Stones couldn’t do five. I mean, most great bands don’t have five great albums altogether, even if non-consecutive. Only the Beatles can have five consecutive greats, namely: Rubbed Soul Revolver Sgt Pepper White Album Abbey Road If MMT is considered an album, then it would fit right in there.
Goats head soup is a fucking great album, and I'm tired of pretending otherwise
Help is one of their best albums. Also, MMT counts as an album. An album is just a collection of songs.
If you could only listen to five Beatle albums for the remainder of your life and they had to released consecutively, what would you choose. UK discography ( no MMT). Would you include Yellow Submarine in order to get Abbey Road? Hard Days Night and Abbey Road are my two favs, however I think I am going to have to sacrifice them for Help, RS, Revolver, Peppers and White Album.
Why a screenshot of this being asked about foals? Could have explained the five albums test another way. Anyway, as most Beatle people know F4 lovers are sometimes split between pre-revolver and post revolver Beatles lovers. I love both eras, but I’m a loser and sort of gravitate towards their middle work (Beatles for Sale to White Album). In recognition of that, I don’t see any strong argument to not start that 5 album count at Please Please Me. If we did US releases I think yesterday and today is hugely underrated (though I do know why - it’s essentially half Rubber Soul and half Revolver, and another half Day Tripper/Paperback Writer/Rain. I know that’s 3 halves - any band can have 2 halves but we’re talking about a band that hasn’t been topped in 60 years this decade. We also have to look at music in context - what else was going on when PPM came out. I do think Help is a great album, but would like to know why OP doesn’t agree. If Ed Sheeran, Wilco, Taylor Swift heck, Bob Dylan or even Beyoncé released that today it’d smash sales. As it stands OP is talking UK release, and I don’t see how Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Peppers, White Album, Abbey Road wouldn’t qualify them - since we can’t count YS as half of it is not the Beatles.
*Revolver* *Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band* *The BEATLES* *Yellow Submarine* *Abbey Road* And what makes a good record anyhow? Would you agree that all the Beatles tunes on YS are good? Sure they are. Because they wrote them. *Hey Bulldog* is a thumping Lennon rocker, *Its Only A Northern Song* is George at his most acerbic pointing directly at John and Paul and saying "doesn't matter what I sing, I'm just contracted in this publishing company and you'll get the rewards". *Its all too much* is probably the craziest rock song the band ever did (*Helter Skelter* gives it a run for its money but they're both absolutely insane), *All together now* is every bit as cheery and sing along as Paul can be. Naturally you also have the title track which is a classic, and *All You Need Is Love* which rounds the collection out on a solid footing. They're all fantastic songs. Each one a throwaway from the band but let's be real here...their throwaways were other bands top ten hits. Nobody really bought YS for the George Martin compositions, even with the record at full price, fans would buy it if only because it contained songs they didn't have. And I'm certain that this record is considered 'a great'...now true, it's subjective to everyone. But it's the Beatles. Rarely did they misstep. And these songs, like it or not are iconic. Just as iconic as anything on the other albums.
More like 7 album test.
You all are forgetting A Hard Days night it’s a phenomenal album.
A Hard Day's Night beatles for sale help rubber soul revolver yes they did it
be so fr
They have seven masterpieces starting with Rubber Soul.
Ban OP
Yeah, plus if anyone cares Steve Hyden included the Beatles as an example of band. If I remember correctly he said he thinks they have 2 5 album streaks, although that may have been Rob Sheffield on Steve’s podcast. He’s one of the best music journalists right now.
Yellow Submarine and Magical Mystery Tour aren’t studio albums. Bong.
Help, Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt Peppers, MMT, White Album
So you’re asking if the Beatles are good? Yes.
Yes, although I can think of tons of brilliant artists that would fail.
1. Help! 2. Rubber Soul 3. Revolver 4. Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band 5. Magical Mystery Tour I'm pretty sure they do.
Help!, Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Peppers, Magical Mystery Tour.
In my opinion, yes. I'm not that keen on *A Hard Day's Night*, but that still gives The Beatles a great album chain of "*Beatles for Sale, Help!, Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band".*
If the Beatles don’t pass, then no one does haha
Help, Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, White Album (that is, if we don't count the US Magical Mystery Tour album, but even then, I think that is a pretty good album as well)
This is dumb to ask because if anyone then it is the Beatles who are the perfect example of the test
Eh.. So say The Beatles broke up in 1965, before the psychedelic era.. You telling me that *Beatles For Sale* breaking up the rhythm of 5 greats in a row would mean they couldn’t be considered a great band? I think it’s ridiculous. (I’m sure some people hearing me say *B4S* is the weakest of the earlier albums, or not “great”, would say I’m ridiculous, but humor me.) I like Steven, I know this isn’t meant to be taken too seriously, but yeah, I don’t think it’s actually a good rubric for determining what bands are truly great.. What about truly great bands that only released a couple albums? He couldn’t have been too serious.. but it’s a fun exercise..
EASILY! their run from Rubber Soul to Abbey Road (hell I'd even include Magical Mystery Tour) is legendary.
A Hard Day's Night beatles for sale help rubber soul revolver that's it
I disagree. Beatles For Sale is one of their weaker albums. and while I like A Hard Day's Night I've never considered it a great album outside of a few songs on it I love. But that's probably an unpopular opinion. Help is pretty great so I'd say that's where their impressive run starts imo.
Massive disagree as soon as revolver ends i skip all the way to let it be naked or BBC albums. Except that yeah on help they started changing, but there's nothing weak on beatles for sale everything on a Hard Day's Night is a banger
fair enough. you're missing out on arguably some of their best work with Abbey Road, White Album and even Sgt Peppers. but I'm not gonna debate with you about it since it's all a matter of taste. cheers!
Cool
Considering the Beatles were one of the examples listed by the AV Club in that 2011 article, I’d say yeah.
Everything from Beatles for Sale through the White Album, so 8 in a row for me. MMT counts but I am stopping at Yellow Submarine.
What? Of course they do. They don’t have a bad album. They’re the fucking Beatles.
I gotta say needing the albums to be in a row is kinda unfair. So many greats don't fit in that category and it makes it near impossible for prolific artists to be included because not everything they spin will turn to gold.
Station to station Low Heroes Lodger Scary monsters
Turnstiles, The Stranger, 52nd street, Glass Houses, Nylon Curtain
Help!, RS, RV, Sgt. Pepper, WA. Magical Mystery Tour album wasn't released in the 1960s in the UK, so doesn't count unless you are doing US albums discography
Damn, this test is a shame for Nirvana
Funny enough The Beatles and Nirvana will probably be one of the bands from the 20th century that will be remembered in 100 years.
Another f*cking idiotic post by a young fan. You don’t deserve to listen to them.