More

Martin Lewis

Martin Lewis

Posted April 8, 2009 | 12:43 PM (EST)

Help! New York Times Desperately Seeking Beatles Expert...


"Moreover, the group's first seven albums (through 'Revolver') include only about 25 minutes of music." - Allan Kozinn - New York Times - April 8, 2009

2009-04-08-Help.jpg
The Beatles signal their reaction to Kozinn's latest gaffe.
Photo: Robert Freeman. © Apple Corps

Actual Running Times Of The Beatles' First Seven Albums


• #1 "Please Please Me" - 32:46

• #2 "With The Beatles" - 33.24

• #3 "A Hard Day's Night" - 30:30

• #4 "Beatles For Sale" - 34:13

• #5 "Help!" - 34:21

• #6 "Rubber Soul" - 35:48

• #7 "Revolver" - 34:59

Total running time of the Beatles' first seven albums: 236 minutes

Total running time of the Beatles' first seven albums according to Allan Kozinn (self-styled Beatles expert of the New York Times): approx: 175 minutes

Number of minutes of Beatles recordings that have apparently eluded Allan Kozinn: 61 minutes

After 32 long years of Allan Kozinn being the New York Times' self-appointed resident Beatles expert (including 18 years on staff), the New York Times is finally seeking a Beatles expert who is actually knowledgeable about the Beatles. And/or someone who can do basic math.

Apply:
The Editor
The New York Times
620 Eighth Avenue
New York, NY 10018

Please cite your favorite examples of Kozinn bloviating about the Beatles. (Limit: 27 items)

"Moreover, the group's first seven albums (through 'Revolver') include only about 25 minutes of music." - Allan Kozinn - New York Times - April 8, 2009 The Beatles signal their reaction to Kozinn...
"Moreover, the group's first seven albums (through 'Revolver') include only about 25 minutes of music." - Allan Kozinn - New York Times - April 8, 2009 The Beatles signal their reaction to Kozinn...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 35
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
02:06 PM on 04/09/2009
I absolutely love The Beatles. But the last time I checked McCartney was a billionaire. Is anyone really going to spend several hundred dollars more for the re-re-remaster of The Beatles? After all this time and all that money made by all those people they should release the catalog to the public domain. Al least the bit torrent sites will have it all available a few minutes after its release. To quote Lennon; "Power to the people!"
12:52 PM on 04/10/2009
Doesn't Michael Jackson own the Beatle's catalog?
photo
Bitsko
He of the smoldering eyes
11:58 AM on 04/09/2009
Very funny, but it's called a simple typo.
photo
MajorKong
If the pilot's good, see, I mean if he's reeeally
09:08 AM on 04/09/2009
Mr. Lewis,

Remember how you used to laugh at your dad because he was still listening to Glen Miller?

'nuff said.
10:51 AM on 04/09/2009
Mr. MajorKong

No I don't remember that. Because I didn't. I was fortunate enough to realize very early on that music and other art is not defined by the era in which it is created - but by its excellence or otherwise. Which is why I cherished (and still do) Glenn Miller, Ella Fitzgerald, Shakespeare, the Marx Bros, the Beatles and much more besides - and I enjoy listening to some contemporary music too.

However, I do understand that a lot of people suffer from "date-ism" and their prejudices are governed by that affliction. My condolences to you.
photo
MajorKong
If the pilot's good, see, I mean if he's reeeally
01:05 PM on 04/09/2009
So you're not one of those Baby Boomers who thinks music achieved perfection in 1970 and nothing's been recorded since?
05:02 PM on 04/08/2009
The Beatles album that came out in late 1963/early 1964 in the US on the Capitol label was entitled "Meet the Beatles".

If this were not true, Imus wouldn;'t have been able to include in his mid '80s bit about "The Black Beatles" the album title "Beat the Meatles" (which was a joke that was old enough to vote by that time).
05:20 PM on 04/08/2009
"Meet the Beatles" was the first Capitol album. It was preceded by "Introducing the Beatles" on VeeJay.
02:07 AM on 04/09/2009
Which were BOTH preceded by "Please Please Me (with Love Me Do and 12 other songs)" on Parlophone.
05:27 PM on 04/08/2009
"Meet The Beatles" was released on January 20th 1964. It was a US compilation (not an original studio album) drawing songs from the Beatles' second album "With The Beatles", two sides of a UK single and a track from the Beatles' first album "Please Please Me". George Martin's work was "enhanced" without his permission and to the dismay of him and the Beatles - with some shoddy fake stereo and reverb. Added to make the Beatles "more palatable to American ears" by the Capitol Records executive who had turned down the Beatles four times in the previous year! And who then added his name as a producer on the album jacket!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
beckpod1
04:46 PM on 04/08/2009
What's more interesting is the amount of recording time with each album.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
jl4141
Unless I'm wrong, I'm never wrong.
02:44 PM on 04/08/2009
And since some posters here are astutely referencing the American LP releases, let us not forget that "The Beatles' Second Album" was their third US album release. But who's counting?
04:50 PM on 04/08/2009
The Beatles' "Second Album" was their second LP release on Capitol in the US. The first US album, "Introducing the Beatles," was rejected by Capitol and licensed by EMI to VeeJay records in Chicago for US release. So, Capitol was counting only their own releases, with a probable backhanded swipe at VeeJay.

The rights to the first LP later reverted to Capitol, the EMI subsidiary, and was released as "The Early Beatles."
05:28 PM on 04/08/2009
Allan Kozinn?! His count would be interesting to see!
02:25 PM on 04/08/2009
Tsk, tsk.
Now riddle me this, can a Canadian such as myself apply?
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
jl4141
Unless I'm wrong, I'm never wrong.
02:45 PM on 04/08/2009
Go ahead, knock yourself oot.
02:04 PM on 04/08/2009
In fairness to long-suffering Beatles fans who read the New York Times, Kozinn was specifically referring to the original UK Beatles albums in his article and not to the notorious Capitol "compilations" that were - incidentally - publicly disdained by the Beatles themselves and George Martin. So the codswallop from Kozinn was exactly that...
02:11 PM on 04/08/2009
The compilations were disdained and, perhaps, disdainful, but I posit that the edited "Rubber Soul" and "Revolver" releases were better and more cohesive than the British originals.

It was what was left off that made the compilations disdainful. "What Goes On?" indeed.
05:34 PM on 04/08/2009
I tend to defer to the Beatles and George Martin on what was "better" and "more cohesive". They had a pretty good idea what they were doing...
05:54 PM on 04/08/2009
One could make the case that the Capitol Rubber Soul was -- by accident or default -- "better" than Parlophone's, in that "I've Just Seen A Face" and "It's Only Love" are arguably more appropriate side openers than "Drive My Car" and "What Goes On" on an otherwise mostly acoustic album, as you point out, in terms of cohesion. But to suggest the US Revolver is in any way superior to the UK release is, I'm sorry, asinine. All Capitol did on the US Revolver was omit three Lennon tunes: "I'm Only Sleeping," "Dr. Robert," and "And Your Bird Can Sing," making a 14-track LP into an 11-track one. How can any album be made *better* by such unconscionable deletions?
01:48 PM on 04/08/2009
In fairness to Mr. Kozinn, the times you list above are accurate, I think, for the original British release and the CD as issued worldwide.

The original American LP releases typically, through "Revolver," had fewer songs and less overall time. For example, the American Capitol "Rubber Soul" LP did not include "Drive My Car," "Nowhere Man," "What Goes On," and "If I Needed Someone," all of which were on the British LP and are included on the American CD.

Parlophone did not include singles on LPs, while Capitol did. So, Capitol would take a few songs from two albums, like "Rubber Soul" and "Revolver," add a few singles, and come up with a third marketable LP: "Yesterday...and Today."
05:13 PM on 04/08/2009
Yesterday ... and Today actually culled from THREE albums plus ONE (double A-side) UK single: "We Can Work It Out"/"Day Tripper." The *title* song, "Yesterday," and "Act Naturally" originally from Parlophone Help! LP.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Michael Giltz
freelance writer
06:35 PM on 04/08/2009
Yes, but the new CD releases are of the UK versions, not the US, so Kozinn is wrong. He should have said 33 minutes.
03:00 AM on 04/09/2009
But that does not refute his larger point: That both the stereo and mono versions could have been released on a single CD.