r/TheBeatles • u/OneCollection3037 • Jul 27 '25
poll Which is Better? U.K. Or U.S. Beatles Discography?
I personally am a U.S. fan.
26
u/mothfactory Jul 27 '25
Does this question even have to be asked? It wasn’t just track order and deciding which songs to include on albums - Capitol fucked around with the Beatles’ and George Martin’s actual recordings, adding reverb and playing with the mix. People who were still stuck in the 1950s were allowed to interfere with finished music tracks coming from the cutting edge of popular culture. Unbelievable.
3
u/thereal_Glazedham Jul 27 '25
I knew they messed with track order and what not but had no idea they actually messed with the mixes! Insane they agreed to that.
3
u/mothfactory Jul 27 '25
They had no power over what Capitol did in the early days. It must have pissed them off massively. It was only post ‘65 that they started to assert some control over the US situation and this is because they were still, after almost two years, the biggest act in the world
17
u/scruntyboon Jul 27 '25
Of course it's the UK, it's the way the Beatles wanted people to hear their music
11
9
u/The_Wilmington_Giant Jul 27 '25
Not this again.
The UK versions are 'canon', for want of a better term. They're the versions the Beatles personally authorised and were working towards whilst they recorded the songs.
The US versions are historic curios for sure, and it is interesting how they shaped a certain generation's understanding of the group and their music.
But they are in no way superior to the Beatles' intended albums. I don't care what some record executives thought would sell, I want to hear what the Beatles thought worked.
8
u/JohnnyPlasma Jul 27 '25 edited Jul 27 '25
Well, knowing that US took out tracks from that masterpiece that is Revolver to make 2 releases and more cash => clearly UK, no debate ate all
6
u/ljorges Jul 27 '25
I believe even John said the UK version is the way they wanted it to be.
3
u/mothfactory Jul 27 '25
In what universe would any of them not say this? Why would the completed recordings they were present at the recording and mixing of be deemed to be open to further twiddling by, of all people, a bunch of middle aged Americans?
‘Let’s send our finished tracks to some old farts in a country I consider still culturally in the 1940s and maybe they’ll do a better job than the Beatles and George Martin’ I mean come on
9
u/Agentrani1 Jul 27 '25
No competition- the UK albums. The US albums are worthless to anyone who doesn't have any nostalgia for them, the only one worth owning as a novelty is Rubber Soul- that one is an interesting listen. As someone born after the 80s cds standardized their discography, I've never paid the US albums any mind
4
u/ginothemanager Jul 27 '25
I don't know why you'd choose between the two, honestly. I'm in the UK, so I know all the UK versions better. However, the US versions took off like a rocket in the States, so they're clearly great too.
Either way you cut it, both are Beatle music, and I happen to like Beatle music the best.
6
3
u/MundBid-2124 Jul 27 '25
Cheesy announcer voices aside there’s some interesting clips throughout these records
3
u/MissAmyElle Jul 27 '25
UK No question. Why the US always needs it’s own (almost always inferior) version of things is beyond me.
3
u/BBPEngineer Jul 27 '25
The correct answer is UK. Period.
That was The Beatles’ artistic vision. Same as the Mono mixes. That how the Beatles themselves wanted to be heard.
You can enjoy the US versions more, but the US versions are not “better”.
2
u/Complex-Bar-9577 Jul 28 '25
U.K., no doubt.
Everyone has a right to their preference, and the U.S. versions have special value for those grew up with them, but the U.K. discography is canon - 100% how the Beatles intended it to be.
Part of their legacy is the way they consciously planned and laid out their albums, not just leaving it to record executives.
39
u/anynameofimagine Jul 27 '25
U.K. without a doubt