"Isn’t It a Pity" - George Harrison
Printed From: Top 40 Music on CD
Category: Top 40 Music On Compact Disc
Forum Name: Chat Board
Forum Description: Chat away but please observe the chat board rules
URL: https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=7479
Printed Date: 05 June 2025 at 12:59am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.07 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: "Isn’t It a Pity" - George Harrison
Posted By: Todd Ireland
Subject: "Isn’t It a Pity" - George Harrison
Date Posted: 10 June 2013 at 10:20pm
| In 1970, George Harrison's "Isn't It a Pity" was issued as the flip side of "My Sweet Lord" on the commercial 45 release. Given that "Isn't It a Pity" clocks in at over 7:00 on the 45 and LP, does anyone know if a shorter edit was ever issued on a promo 45? Granted, if any artist was capable of getting such a lengthy single played on Top 40 radio at the time, I reckon it would've been a former Beatle! |
Replies:
Posted By: jimct
Date Posted: 11 June 2013 at 2:39am
|
Todd, in all my travels/research, I have never either seen or known of any
other U.S. 45 pressing of this song, besides the rare, full-Apple-on-both- sides (to me, indicating a double-A side Apple intent) commercial 45 pressing. Not even a stock copy with a black star on it, which I've understood sometimes indicated it was a copy that Apple sent to radio (I think all the Badfinger hits on Apple had this variation.) Similarly, I never heard anything but the full, 7 min + version on AM radio as a late 1970 current, and I did hear it quite a bit. But Todd, guess what's now on eBay, as of 6-11-13, for two more days? A "My Sweet Lord" test pressing! A seller named "bjimmy9001", states he has run "Vinyl World Records Plus" since 1959. Half of his store's music categories are either Beatles and/or related, indicating to me he would have some level of Beatle collector expertise. He states in this listing that the "country of origin" for the TP is the United Kingdom. While he may be right, personally, I have my doubts, for three reasons: 1) It has the larger, US 45 hole, not the smaller UK one, with no indication that one was once there, and had been removed/pushed through. 2) It has that telltale, unique to circa-1970 US Capitol pressings, small "groove pattern", around the entire outer edge of the paper label, and 3) Although I'm sure the UK did have white label 45 test pressings made, I haven't personally seen any in my travels (not that I've ever really looked for one!) So let's just say, for the sake of argument, that the TP now on eBay *is* of US origin, and the seller is wrong. (Any Beatle experts? Help!) The good news? He's offering 35% off of his previous sale price. The bad news? That means his "Buy It Now" price has dropped down to a paltry $536.25, from his former $825.00 price! (Luckily for us, this merchant claims to have recently taken a "long, hard look at his previous prices", and adjusted them, to reflect "today's real market values.") As you can see, we consumers are now obviously benefitting from this guy's deep recent, price cuts. ($%#@&!) So Todd, I guess it's now or never. But wait! For still over 500 bucks, do we even know what's on the other side of this TP? Nope. Because only one side of the TP is pictured. (BJimmy has clearly been way too busy patting himself on the back, for his recent pricing epiphany!) This merchant also says that, of late, he's now going the extra mile for us buyers, by offering most of his items as "Buy It Now." (Which I *do* much prefer - what a guy!) Anyone else happen to have some spare change around? BJimmy's new, lower prices are still *way* too "big boy table" for me..... |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 11 June 2013 at 3:44am
|
In Bruce Spizer's excellent book The Beatles Solo on Apple Records, he shows 12 different variations of the original single on Apple 2995. The initial pressing from the Los Angeles plant is the only one to show a black star on the "My Sweet Lord" side. Bruce states that this was a mistake, as both sides were to be considered the A-side. Thus, the second run of labels from that same plant removed the star.
As for the test pressing...I found some photos of it, including the "Isn't It A Pity" side here... http://collectorsfrenzy.com/details/130847126570/George_Harr ison_Test_Pressing_Vinyl_My_Sweet_Lord_7 ...which shows the time as over 7 minutes. I think it's pretty safe (and cheaper!) to assume that the test pressings are no different than the commercial 45 in this case. |
Posted By: jimct
Date Posted: 11 June 2013 at 3:54am
|
Thanks for the enlightenment, Paul! Excellent info! (FYI, I believe the copy I
saw from Paul's link is exactly the same as the alleged "UK pressing" now for sale on eBay. To see Paul's link, leave out the "space typo" Paul made, as to George's last name, "Harr ison". It then works fine. And that Collectors Frenzy TP copy went for just 77 bucks, only 4 months ago, Now that's more like it - BJimmy from eBay, take note!) And I just ordered that Bruce Spizer book from Amazon. In my experiences, buying quality reference books about music is always a good thing! And speaking of that, Paul, when can I expect my new Hot 100 Singles book from RR to arrive? :) |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 11 June 2013 at 4:06am
Jim, I've just sent Mr. Spizer an e-mail about "Isn't It A Pity"...I'll let you know if I hear back from him. His whole series of books on the Beatles are some of the best I've ever seen. As for the new Top Pop Singles book, it just went to the printer yesterday and we should have it here by the first week of July. Hopefully you'll have it in your hands by mid-July. BTW, that's not my typo on the link above (I tried to fix it, but it just wouldn't take). Anyhow, just take out the space in Harrison and it should work:) |
jimct wrote:Posted By: Hykker
Date Posted: 11 June 2013 at 7:07am
Is the double-green apple pressing of MSL/IAAP all that rare, or is there a rare variation of it? Every original copy I've ever seen was this way. |
Posted By: jimct
Date Posted: 11 June 2013 at 7:22am
|
Steve, I didn't mean rare in that way. Like you said, every copy of MSL/IIAP
I've ever seen does have the 45 configured that way. I meant rare to the fact that, in most every other instance, one side of commercial Apple 45s always had an "intact" Apple represent the A-side, and a "sliced" Apple for the B- side. Even for The Beatles' 1969 double-sided hit 45, "Come Together/Something", the latter, a #3 hit in its own right, had the "sliced" Apple label. There's nothing criminal about it, I suppose. But as a person who owned plenty of Apple 45s, it just looked a bit unusual to the eye - to have the sliced apple side be a hit, too. I like the "double full Apple" concept here, if that was the label's intent. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 11 June 2013 at 11:19am
| Just heard from Bruce Spizer and he's not aware of any shorter releases for "Isn't It A Pity". He also informs me that he's working on an electronic version of his Beatles Vee-Jay book. Again, I highly recommend all of his books to anyone who's interested in the different Beatles pressings. Those books are the gold standard for this type of research. |
Posted By: Todd Ireland
Date Posted: 13 June 2013 at 9:00pm
| Thanks for the input, gentlemen. And, Jim, your commentary about the eBay seller's "pricing epiphany" got me laughing out loud! Too funny! |
Posted By: jimct
Date Posted: 14 July 2013 at 12:08pm
|
To put a bow on this one, my commercial 45, confirmed as Apple 2995, with
deadwax of "S45X 47404", has a listed time of (7:10), but an actual time of (7:06). FYI, the three current db CDs that feature the hit version of this song run either (7:06) or (7:07). |
Posted By: PopArchivist
Date Posted: 08 December 2018 at 9:39pm
|
Paul,
In the Pop Annual you don't have Isn't It A Pity by George Harrison listed in 1970 as the Double A-Side like you do for other songs of that year. Is there anything behind the choice? Since it was listed as a Double A-Side when the song went to #1 on the Hot 100 shouldn't that count for something? Also there is a shorter 4:45 version (Version 2) of Isn't it A Pity but I can't find it. Is that the radio edit or an entirely different version for radio? |
Posted By: aaronk
Date Posted: 08 December 2018 at 10:28pm
|
Isn't It A Pity (Version 2) is one of the tracks on All Things Must Pass. It's not a radio version at all, but rather a different recording of the song. ------------- Aaron Kannowski http://www.uptownsound.com" rel="nofollow - Uptown Sound http://www.919thepeak.com" rel="nofollow - 91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 09 December 2018 at 5:52am
That was a judgement call by Joel. He's gone back and forth on some of those "tag-along" B-sides over the years, as far as the Pop Annual goes. Has to do with if he thinks the songs actually got decent airplay or not. I don't think "Isn't It A Pity" got nearly the same amount of airplay as "My Sweet Lord." When in doubt, we look at the Cash Box peak position (they charted B-sides separately) and "Isn't It A Pity" only managed to peak at #46. |
Posted By: PopArchivist
Date Posted: 09 December 2018 at 12:33pm
|
Paul,
I've noticed in assembling 1970 that a lot of the AA sides and B-sides are not included. I choose to include them but I can see why if its a tag along you don't. When you are assembling a collection compared to assembling a book how much airplay it got is a consideration. I am one of the minority that believe if it appears on the Hot 100 at all, even as a B-Side, it should be included. This includes those two 2011 songs (S & M) and (Til The World Ends) that were propelled by a remix for just one week. To ignore the remixes, especially S & M going from #2 to #1 is not being true to the chart itself. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 09 December 2018 at 1:59pm
Everything is included in Top Pop Singles, but the Pop Annual is a bit different, as it ranks by popularity and most of those B-sides were NOT nearly as popular as the A-sides. |
Posted By: PopArchivist
Date Posted: 09 December 2018 at 2:09pm
| I do think that if a song reached #1 like My Sweet Lord and had a AA side it should be listed if it was listed that way on Billboard. Just my two cents. I can see how the Annual would be different, but hopefully you can see my point. |
Posted By: RoknRobnLoxley
Date Posted: 11 December 2018 at 8:32am
I agree. Philosophically, I wish Joel had simply given us all chart info as Billboard posted it on their charts. Over the years, Billboard flip-flopped back and forth themselves as to what they were reporting on their charts, individual "sides" A or B, or "records" = combo sides A/B. Instead of Joel interpreting the sides vs. records data for us, he could have made it easier on himself and just given us the "positions" data as is. If he wished to add extra notes to the data, that would have been fine/excellent, too. As with all of us chart nuts, we are most grateful and thankful to Joel for all of his many books, and Paul, too! |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 11 December 2018 at 10:05am
|
I understand exactly where you guys are coming from. I'm
first and foremost a chart nut too! Too bad Billboard didn't just stick to keeping those A and B sides separate. That's why I think the Cash Box info comes in handy in those cases. Don't even get me started on Come Together/Something by The Beatles! |
Posted By: jebsib
Date Posted: 11 December 2018 at 12:49pm
|
My personal bug-a-boo is John Denver's "Calypso" - At one time a (believable)
#2 hit based on airplay levels and A-Side position on Hot 100, now a tag-along. |
Posted By: eriejwg
Date Posted: 11 December 2018 at 3:59pm
That's a good example, though I much prefer Calypso. In fact, I don't even carry I'm Sorry in my library. ------------- John Gallagher Erie, PA https://www.johngallagher.com" rel="nofollow - John Gallagher Wedding & Special Event Entertainment / Snapblast Photo Booth |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 12 December 2018 at 5:04am
|
Yeah, I'm not 100% sure where I stand on "I'm Sorry"/
"Calypso". "Calypso" only got to #26 in Cash Box. However, I heard it a lot back in 1975, so I think it would've probably charted a bit higher on its own. The problem with saying it peaked at #2, is that "I'm Sorry" had legitimately peaked at #1 on its own, so by the time Billboard started showing "Calypso", "I'm Sorry" still had to account for a lot of the chart points. Guess we'll never know for sure just how popular "Calypso" really was. BTW, I think I'm in the minority in that I prefer "I'm Sorry" to "Calypso." Something about the lyrics to "I'm Sorry" really touch me. |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 02 January 2019 at 2:57pm
|
"Calypso" got a ton of radio airplay in the area I lived growing up - and I received Boston, MA and Providence, RI stations. I love "Calypso" and unfortunately, "I'm Sorry" never did anything for me. I'm sorry.
But ... knowing how many people love "Calypso", I'd tend to think if "Calypso" were initially chosen as the single instead of "I'm Sorry", it would have been a top 5 hit on its own. Just my theory. We'll never know. But not having access to Billboard Magazine back in '75, I'd have guessed "Calyspo" WAS a top 5 hit. I'm not even sure back then I knew it was tied in to "I'm Sorry". Funny how a post about "Isn't It a Pity" led to "I'm Sorry" and "Calypso". Normally I wouldn't have clicked on a post about "Isn't It a Pity" but I'm glad I clicked this one. |