I don't like The Beatles, am I the only one?

[GroeneLeeuw]

Sometimes the 'Best Of' album has songs that are not on any of the albums. Such as on the Steely Dan compilations 'Greatest Hits' and 'Gold.'

Yep, that too, bought one by Van Halen because of it, 2 new songs and 1 that was part of a movie soundtrack and not ever in 1 of the original albums.

 

[mhardy6647]

Sometimes the 'Best Of' album has songs that are not on any of the albums. Such as on the Steely Dan compilations 'Greatest Hits' and 'Gold.'

There's that, too.
Although -- and I am not necessarily proud of this -- there's a copy of the FM soundtrack here someplace.
No Beatles on it, though, to the best of my recollection.
ahem.

 

[aschen]

This is not it. Some things are popular for good reason. Einstein was good at physics, Newton was good at (well a lot of things), Jordan was good at basketball, and the Beatles were good at music.

 

[tineared]

There are quite a few bands that, for me, have some great songs, but may have only one great album.
Two examples for me are Queen and Van Halen. I love both of their first albums, but after that they only had a few great songs on each of the rest of their albums, so they are prime candidates for Best of albums for me. There are also bands that had some songs that I really like, but never had any album worth buying. I don't like "filler" songs...
I can feel the hate from the Queen and Van Halen fans out there

 

[IPunchCholla]

This is not it. Some things are popular for good reason. Einstein was good at physics, Newton was good at (well a lot of things), Jordan was good at basketball, and the Beatles were good at music.

All of which is true, but I don't like basketball or the Beatles. There is less choice in the matter for physics, calculus, gravity... though I often don't like aspects of those things as well.

 

[GroeneLeeuw]

I can feel the hate from the Queen and Van Halen fans out there

You should!

 

[Leporello]

Sometimes the 'Best Of' album has songs that are not on any of the albums. Such as on the Steely Dan compilations 'Greatest Hits' and 'Gold.'

FM and Here at the Western World, perhaps?

 

[Mart68]

FM and Here at the Western World, perhaps?

Right. Two of their best tunes.

 

[Rick63]

There are quite a few bands that, for me, have some great songs, but may have only one great album.
Two examples for me are Queen and Van Halen. I love both of their first albums, but after that they only had a few great songs on each of the rest of their albums, so they are prime candidates for Best of albums for me. There are also bands that had some songs that I really like, but never had any album worth buying. I don't like "filler" songs...
I can feel the hate from the Queen and Van Halen fans out there

I'm with you on Queen so all I have is their Greatest Hits I-III 3 CD set, and even then I skip half the songs when I listen to it. But I do like most of the songs of the Diamond Dave era Van Halen, so I got this at a great price to have it all.

 

[Rick63]

... and then there are the Greatest Hits albums that include the artist's Greatest Greatest Hit in the form of some jive-butt** live version or alternate take or somesuch nonsense. Frickin** Styx re-recorded the song Lady for their Greatest Hits!?!

_______________
* yeah, I know: this is oxymoronic weasel wording.
** please pardon my vulgarity. I blame it on the dudgeon.

That drives me bonkers as I don't want to hear any remixes or live versions of the original ones of the songs on a GH album. Now, if they added a second disc or LP for those kind of songs as they sometimes do that would be a different story, and even then there's a good chance the second disc would only ever be played once...

 

[wadude]

seems to me that Greatest Hits albums virtually always* leave off one Greatest Hit, thus pretty much forcing the dilettante also to buy the Greatest Hits, Vol. 2 when it comes out. Lookin' at you, Reg Dwight, Elton John's Greatest Hits, Levon, and Elton John's Greatest Hits, Vol. 2.

... and then there are the Greatest Hits albums that include the artist's Greatest Greatest Hit in the form of some jive-butt** live version or alternate take or somesuch nonsense. Frickin** Styx re-recorded the song Lady for their Greatest Hits!?!

but not that I'm bitter or anything.

_______________
* yeah, I know: this is oxymoronic weasel wording.
** please pardon my vulgarity. I blame it on the dudgeon.

Chuck Berry re-recorded most of his hits for another label (Mercury? I think a few of the original rockers recorded for the label for the same reason) because he was finally able to make some money off them. It took me some time to figure this out and get The Great Twenty-Eight, recommended by Keith Richards.

 

[EJ3]

seems to me that Greatest Hits albums virtually always* leave off one Greatest Hit, thus pretty much forcing the dilettante also to buy the Greatest Hits, Vol. 2 when it comes out. Lookin' at you, Reg Dwight, Elton John's Greatest Hits, Levon, and Elton John's Greatest Hits, Vol. 2.

... and then there are the Greatest Hits albums that include the artist's Greatest Greatest Hit in the form of some jive-butt** live version or alternate take or somesuch nonsense. Frickin** Styx re-recorded the song Lady for their Greatest Hits!?!

but not that I'm bitter or anything.

_______________
* yeah, I know: this is oxymoronic weasel wording.
** please pardon my vulgarity. I blame it on the dudgeon.

We are 600+ posts in, so I'm going to go off on a tangent: The closest I ever got to any of the Beatle's was answering a phone at a record store (for the store owner) that was called "Octopuses Garden" and it was Yoko Ono calling to speak to the store owner (who had traveled to Russia with some or all of the Beatles]) and was friends with a couple of them. And at some point I went to see Paul McCartney and Wings in Atlanta when "RAM" was out.
Now, to "LIVE" recordings:
I listen to a lot more 'so & so' "Live" than anything else. Maybe because that is how I spent my early 70's-1986. At concerts frequently, or in smaller venues (night clubs that hold 800-1200 people). I was a weekend Radio DJ (allowing me discount and free tickets, back stage passes, etc. [sort of the point of the job]) from 1974-1986 and went to my first concerts in the very early 1970's in Charleston, SC & then: (as far as NOLA [stands for New Orleans, Louisiana]; Savanah, Augusta, Atlanta, GA; Myrtle Beach, Columbia, Greenville, SC; Charlotte, NC, Raleigh, Greensboro, NC and Norfolk, VA. And many other places. Plus venues and river boats (on the Danube) in Germany and Austria.
So, I would hear the bands and then (usually) be very disappointed by the studio album I bought after I got home. It was the same production studio filtered stuff that I played at the radio station. When I got a hold of live recordings (legit or bootleg) I was usually a lot happier. + I ran sound for many local and regional bands.
The happenings at one of the early concerts that I attended which made the local news:

Cops got called to Ozzy Osbourne's Charleston show in the ‘70s. Here's what happened.​

• By Kalyn Oyer [email protected]
• Jul 25, 2025

Black Sabbath played Charleston County Hall in 1972.
Provided

In the wake of Ozzy Osbourne's death and messages of remembrance all across the world, The Post and Courier looked back at a show he played at the old Charleston County Hall music venue on King Street in 1983.

Some of our readers then reached out to inform us of an even earlier date that the "Prince of Darkness" performed at that same venue. More than a decade earlier, on Aug. 24, 1972, he played with Black Sabbath at the same place Elvis Presley, Alice Cooper and ZZ Top once graced.

The twist was that the band only performed three and a half songs before Osbourne allegedly threw the microphone stand over the drummer's head and stormed off stage.

Charlestonian Stevie Chase recalls the concert that he and his buddies attended during his freshman year at St. Andrew's Parish High School. Chase said most of the class was there, in fact.

"All the boys from the South Windermere neighborhood piled into two different vehicles — one car and one van — and made our way down to King Street for the show we had been waiting for for months," he told The Post and Courier.

This was right after Chase had purchased "Master of Reality," Black Sabbath's third studio album, released in the summer of 1971. This would be his third-ever rock show.

Before the Gaillard was built, Chase said there were really only two venues uptown on King Street. Skateland was a favorite for birthday parties, and County Hall hosted concerts and wrestling matches.

Gentle Giant was the opener, "quick and uneventful," according to Chase. Then Black Sabbath came on, late.

"The crowd was ready, wild, and the anticipation in the air was thick," Chase said. "The opening chords of Tony Iommi's heavy guitar and Geezer Butler's bass almost brought the rafters down. Bill Ward's drums echoed off the back of the auditorium. Ozzy Osbourne grabbed the mic stand and started to sing."

"Sweet Leaf" was first, lighting the crowd up. By the second song, the smoke and haze had settled in, said Chase. He doesn't remember that one, but up third was "War Pigs," which arrived like a "Crazy Train," Chase joked.

And then the chaos broke out.


David Shorter, who was also in attendance, remembers it from the ground floor, while Chase watched from above on the balcony.

In the middle of the song, "Ozzy ... launched the microphone stand over the drummer's head, and that was the end of the concert," Shorter recollected.

According to Setlist.fm, the concert was "stopped midway through the third song due to Ozzy Osbourne having throat problems."

"There was nothing wrong with his voice," Shorter insisted. "He was mad because they were playing to a half-empty building, plus County Hall was a dump with no air conditioning and was miserable."

After the house lights came back on and someone informed the crowd the show was over, there was a "riot," according to our two readers.

"We tried to get our money back at the ticket office outside," said Shorter. "Maybe 75 people were very upset because (there was) no refund. Police were called in to restore order."

Chase remembers angry attendees throwing beer bottles at the stage and then breaking the glass window to the ticket kiosk out front. He got out of there quickly, though he and his friends to this day talk about how Osbourne still owes them each $5. (Yep, that was the price of a big-name ticket at the time.)

"When we were driving home, the guy on the radio said to the parents of any kids attending that concert not to worry, the Charleston police have everything under control," said Shorter.

He missed most of the aftermath but certainly will never forget that eventful performance.

To this day, Shorter has two of Osbourne's 8-tracks that he can still play in his '66 red Ford Fairlane hardtop. He'll be listening this weekend in honor.

Kalyn Oyer​

Kalyn Oyer is a Charleston native and the Features and Arts & Culture Lab Editor for The Post and Courier. An award-winning journalist, she has written about the local arts scene and taken music festival and concert photos for more than a decade.

 

[wadude]

Tangent? British I think.

(A bad word play on the band Argent…sorry!)

 

[EJ3]

Tangent? British I think.

I have only passed through England and Ireland, either changing planes, changing airports or both. And one time, a few hours by ship that I never got off of.
I grew up and went to school in Charleston, SC, USA. While I have made 9 trips to Europe (to my born place of Salzburg, Austria), I was concieved in Charleston and was only in Austria about 2 months aster I was born. So, for me, tangent is not British.
Maybe from algebra/geometry?

tangent​

1590s, in geometry, of a line, "touching, meeting at a point without intersecting," from Latin tangentem (nominative tangens), present participle of tangere "to touch" (from PIE root *tag- "to touch, handle;" the Latin verb also is in tactile, contact, etc.).

First used by Danish mathematician Thomas Fincke in "Geomietria Rotundi" (1583). The extended sense of "slightly connected with a subject" is recorded by 1825. Related: Tangence; tangency.

 

[tineared]

I'm with you on Queen so all I have is their Greatest Hits I-III 3 CD set, and even then I skip half the songs when I listen to it. But I do like most of the songs of the Diamond Dave era Van Halen, so I got this at a great price to have it all.



View attachment 530269

My Queen & Van Halen catalog: Queen I (atmos) & GH II, Van Halen I (mfsl)

 

[Redacted]

Nobody cares who likes or dislikes the Beatles, or Band XYZ for that matter (fill in the XYZ for yourself).

It's not uncommon however, and indeed fine, to pick out and mention bands you do like... I do this from time to time, but not so much on ASR, as I don't want to put my head in a wasp's nest for my possible lack of taste, or not understanding which was the "ultimate mastering" of a given album (c.f. all the hilarious dafty-pants on say, Steve Hoffman, AKA "Please kill me now")

But then I see no end of dull and regurgitative old pot boiler albums being mentioned on ASR, and I wonder if many on here have a decent collection or an interest in looking at new bands, and yet I don't feel a need to comment on taste issues to any individuals.

From a UK perspective, we would consider it a bit weird to just point out one band that you don't like on a forum, but maybe it varies according to where you live. I can't see much fun in listing everything I don't like, for sure.

 

[IPunchCholla]

Nobody cares who likes or dislikes the Beatles, or Band XYZ for that matter (fill in the XYZ for yourself).

It's not uncommon however, and indeed fine, to pick out and mention bands you do like... I do this from time to time, but not so much on ASR, as I don't want to put my head in a wasp's nest for my possible lack of taste, or not understanding which was the "ultimate mastering" of a given album (c.f. all the hilarious dafty-pants on say, Steve Hoffman, AKA "Please kill me now")

But then I see no end of dull and regurgitative old pot boiler albums being mentioned on ASR, and I wonder if many on here have a decent collection or an interest in looking at new bands, and yet I don't feel a need to comment on taste issues to any individuals.

From a UK perspective, we would consider it a bit weird to just point out one band that you don't like on a forum, but maybe it varies according to where you live. I can't see much fun in listing everything I don't like, for sure.

In the US there seems to be a conflation of liking with good. If one likes a song, that means it is a good song, if one dislikes it that means it is bad. It's a way of turning a subjective opinion into an objective one, or at least externalizing subjective opinions. We do it with a lot of stuff.

 

[wadude]

In the US there seems to be a conflation of liking with good. If one likes a song, that means it is a good song, if one dislikes it that means it is bad. It's a way of turning a subjective opinion into an objective one, or at least externalizing subjective opinions. We do it with a lot of stuff.

That's not just a US thing, at all! And you're absolutely correct about subjectivity vs objectivity. In some libraries Thelonious Monk can exist along side the Monkees and Mozart and are appreciated on their own merits and moments. Who's better, John Lee Hooker or John Coltrane?

Also, "New" is practically meaningless as well. New to me, new as in recent, new in terms of advancing a genre in terms of originality or technology? From participating in this thread it would seem that a dividing line between old and useless and new and exciting is sometime around 1990. I get it. In every genre and every century in music history there are moments of radical change and division. It takes patience to hear music from outside of one's culture. We're wired into our existential tribes.

 

[EJ3]

That's not just a US thing, at all! And you're absolutely correct about subjectivity vs objectivity. In some libraries Thelonious Monk can exist along side the Monkees and Mozart and are appreciated on their own merits and moments. Who's better, John Lee Hooker or John Coltrane?

Also, "New" is practically meaningless as well. New to me, new as in recent, new in terms of advancing a genre in terms of originality or technology? From participating in this thread it would seem that a dividing line between old and useless and new and exciting is sometime around 1990. I get it. In every genre and every century in music history there are moments of radical change and division. It takes patience to hear music from outside of one's culture. We're wired into our existential tribes.

In December 2024 I bought a 'new' 2004 Chevy Silverado 1500 SS HD Extended cad truck with 193,000 miles on it. A friend of mine had garage kept it since he bought it from the original owner in 2008. The original owner had used it for heavy towing. It has a had a relatively 'new' full (stripped everything out, off, and dis-assembled repaint.
I gave my 'old' (but fully restored and refurbished) 2000 Nissan Frontier truck to victims of the flooding in North Carolina whose car had washed away in the floods.
So: I got a 'new" to me truck that I had known for many years (and ridden a few hundred miles in but not driven until I drove it home) and the folks that got my 'old' to me truck got a 'new' to them truck.
Around here, if some one says that they got a new vehicle: the likely first question asked of them will be: what model year is it. If it is, in fact, new, they will clarify that.
It's the same if they moved into a 'new' house. Or got a 'new' boat.
For smaller things (that seem to be normally replaceable for various reasons [such as a microwave oven, or a stove] 'new' usually means NEW.
As to records that play on turntables, I got a copy of "whatever" indicates 'older'. But I got a 'new' copy of "whatever' indicates NEW.

 

[wadude]