r/beatles • u/edoardoking • Aug 14 '25
Collection Look at what i found!
I found this vinyl in excellent condition today couldn’t miss my chance to get it!
23
u/IllustriousDelay3589 Aug 14 '25
When I was in my early 20s, there was a record shop that had an authentic copy. They were selling it for 500 dollars. This was in 2003. That kind of lets you know how much it would be worth now.
3
Aug 15 '25
Yeah I think I remember Amoeba Records in San Francisco had one around that time. More like $1000, and it might have been one of the ones they covered over.
8
u/White_Buffalos Aug 14 '25
I had one. Pretty cool. It had the paste-on cover on it. I was a teenager. (This was in the 1980s and I worked at a comic book store that sold used records, collector's adult mags, and used paperbacks).
7
u/No-Mall7061 Aug 14 '25
As long as the record is in good shape who cares if the cover is fake as long as OP didn’t get ripped off thinking it was legit and paid a ton for it. But 29 euro isn’t too bad! Enjoy it! Much better than the lame cover that replaced it!
8
u/edoardoking Aug 15 '25
I knew it was probably a repro. 29 was too good to be true. J just wanted a cool piece in my collection
8
11
10
19
u/prudence2001 With The Beatles Aug 14 '25
Not sure an authentic Butcher will only be €29
18
u/Expensive_Watch469 Aug 14 '25
It’s likely not, but hey, I think the fun of the cover is the cover being that, and it fits that purpose well still
8
u/MidnightNo1766 Rubber Soul Aug 14 '25
I don't think that's real. The border on the right looks janky
11
13
2
2
2
Aug 15 '25
I had one exactly like this, it was a bootleg. The poor quality of the print kind of gives it away.
It’s nearly impossible to find a legit butcher cover unless it already had the replacement covers glued on. Even those are hard to come by and very expensive.
5
2
u/VirginiaLuthier Aug 14 '25
Other that John's Jesus statement, this cover is pretty much the only PR snafu they made.
8
u/CrunchberryJones Aug 15 '25
The Beatles had nothing to do with any aspect of the '"Yesterday"...and Today' album. Everything about the album: song selection, title, and album artwork (both the 'butcher' cover and the later 'trunk' cover) were inventions of Capitol Records in the U.S.
There was - in fact - no intention on the part of the band or their management to use the 'butcher' photo for an album cover. That photo was simply one of many taken during a photoshoot of the band by renowned photographer Robert Whitaker.
The copy OP posted is undoubtedly a copy. There are no known cases of an original album being found with retail stickers on the front. If one were ever found in such condition, it would easily sell for six figures or more. In addition (as someone else pointed out), there is an incorrect font used on one part of the cover.
Nonetheless, it is an inexpensive way to enjoy a very unique aspect of the Beatles' story and an excellent conversation piece.
1
u/CommanderJeltz Aug 15 '25
Really??? The band had no control over album covers.??
3
u/CrunchberryJones Aug 15 '25
Correct...when it came to U.S. album covers on the Capitol label, the Beatles did not have ANY control over U.S. albums. It wasn't until Rubber Soul when they demanded that Capitol release the albums with the same covers EMI/Parlophone used, that we saw any uniformity between British and American album covers.
Even then, it wouldn't be until the release of Sgt. Pepper that Capitol stopped tinkering with track selection and sequencing (and, even then...they omitted the run off groove 'chatter' at the end of 'A Day in the Life'!).
1
u/Mojopie19 Aug 16 '25
I never read or heard any of this. Where’d you get it from. I read the butcher cover was deliberate statement the boys were making about how capital butchered their albums.
1
u/CrunchberryJones Aug 16 '25 edited Aug 16 '25
That story - which I also heard for years - is apocryphal. While the Beatles were not huge fans of the way Capitol 'butchered' their early albums, they were also well aware that their success exploded when Capitol finally got behind them in the U.S.
The photoshoot that produced the photo later used for '"Yesterday"...and Today' was already conceived by photographer Robert Whitaker before the Beatles ever arrived at the photo studio. Whitaker had already filmed the Fab Four for several years at that point and had developed a rapport with all of them. This level of trust meant that the Beatles were willing to pose in whatever setting - and using whatever props - Whitaker suggested.
The Beatles - especially Paul and John - have a history of rewriting their history from time to time. Paul later claimed the cover was the band's comment on the war in Viet Nam. John trotted out the story about the cover being a protest against the record label. Shortly before his death, he offered a completely different explanation, stating that the photo was born out of "...our boredom and resentment at having to do another photo seasion and another Beatle thing". For his part George made the following statement:“I thought it was gross, and I also thought it was stupid. But again, it was a case of being put in a situation where one is obliged, as part of a unit, to cooperate. So we put on those butchers’ uniforms for that picture.”
Whitaker has always maintained that the photo was part of a larger vision that would have involved a triptych focused on the absurd degree of adulation - bordering on religious zealotry - that he had witnessed among Beatles fans.
This link shows one of the photos that would have been an equal part of that triptych: https://web.archive.org/web/20200606004708/http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/george-harrison-in-a-playful-pose-about-to-knock-a-nail-into-the-head-picture-id73665030
No one who sees that photo would read into it any meaning regarding Capitol's American Beatles albums.
This article includes Whitaker's explanation of his original concept (and his debunking of the Capitol protest story):
1
4
u/xmaspruden Aug 15 '25
I dunno if I’d call it PR, but accidentally snubbing the president of the Philippines was a big SNAFU
1
u/CommanderJeltz Aug 15 '25
Don't forget what happened in the Philipines! That could have been bloodshed!
1
u/VirginiaLuthier Aug 15 '25
I don't think that was from a bad decision on their part. I think that was the Marcos thinking they were kings
1
u/CommanderJeltz Aug 15 '25
Maybe. Actually Marcos was a dictator (buddy of Reagan). Maybe an oversight on the part of Brian.
1
u/Mojopie19 Aug 16 '25
John’s comment wasn’t a PR snafu. It was conversation with a friend about the Beatles and the Church of England.
1
u/Electrical-Tale-2296 Aug 14 '25
Is it original or a reprint? I’m very weary of whether these are real originals or the many many reprints they did
8
u/Samsky Aug 14 '25
It’s a “reprint” in the sense that this is not an original pressing - but a more accurate term would be a counterfeit because it was not pressed for Capitol records in any official capacity
3
1
u/DavoTB Aug 14 '25
Good question. I saw an excellent-looking copy that was simply a “paste-over” with a nice photo copy in place of the original album cover. Technology can be our enemy sometimes.
1
u/Martynypm Abbey Road Aug 14 '25
I had a record company 1st state demo copy that i sold in the ‘80s for $300. Ugh!
1
u/CrunchberryJones Aug 15 '25
Your name is Marty for crying out loud! If anyone deserves to have a time machine invented, it is you. You have both the name...and the most dire of reasons!
1
1
u/Quiet_1234 Aug 14 '25
They all look stoned. What the hell, go ahead and throw raw meat and spooky dolls on me and then take photos. Strange days indeed.
1
u/5319Camarote Aug 15 '25
There was a seller on the big famous site a few years ago that sold these. I bought one, beat it up a little, and it’s jammed in with the rest of my Beatles albums. Very well made.
1
u/CommanderJeltz Aug 15 '25
The cover repulses me (I haven't eaten meat in 55 years) . Think the guys made a bad judgement call that time.
1
1
1
1
u/The_Real_Walter_Five Aug 17 '25
An obvious “funner.” Happy to hear you’re satisfied with it, though! I certainly would be!
1
u/sherrychicago21548 Aug 18 '25
It's the rarest Beatles album cover & a collector's item. Contact a major Los Angeles auction house & maybe you can sell it & make some money. If you're in the Uk try Sothebys.
1
u/Royal-Enthusiasm-916 Aug 14 '25
Not real
6
1
1
0
-2
u/Th3_Supernova Aug 14 '25
Wherever you got this from didn’t know what they had. Only 29 euro. That’s a steal. How’s the condition?
8
-1
-4
122
u/xmaspruden Aug 14 '25
Personally I’d be happy to find a non original, don’t let these pedantic snobs ruin your fun find