Reviews (page 7 of 8)
cool debut that sounds part beach boys and part beatles. tough acts to be compared to. 2.5
No private session used for Spotify. Definitely of it's time, it's not my time.
Meh. A worse Beatles
It's interesting, but it's mainly made up of covers, which makes me question it being on this list at a time where contemporaries were writing most of their own music.
The opening track is a GOAT, even if it's a cover. High 2s.
The music sounds nice, but so similar. Historically significant, but musically not my bag.
Encore moins mon kiff que les Rolling Stones, tout se ressemble, rien ne m'ambience, une cacophonie pas désagréable mais sans plus.
Clearly a big influence on the Stone Roses 2 - a good album but not my thing
Another tough one to listen to. Some of those harmonies were painful. A two-hit-wonder so I'll give them a two.
debiutancki albumik byrdsow z 65, najbardziej dziwi to jak rowno grali podczas gdy na kazdej plycie byl prawie inny sklad, chociaz slychac troche ewolucje brzmienia, na mr tambourine manie brakuje tego pazura countrowego, a calosc wydaje sie grana spiewana na jedno kopyto, jakby ktos chcial zrobic kopiuj wklej na zukowa modle, ale chyba najbardziej meczyla slodkosc lirycznosci tej plyty, bo poza tytulowym tamburyniarzem ktory otwiera krazek i chimes of freedom, oba traki autorstwa dylana, ktory poza nimi ma jeszcze kilka kawalkow, orginalne utwory bandy pisal pan clark, wiec 50/50 split coverow a orginalnych trakow, ale co z tego jak wszystko takie folkowo ckliwe, 31 minut i 12 trakow jest srednia, ale spotifaj fajna wersje zaproponowal gdzie byly do posluchania alternatywne tejki, no i tam mozna cos znalezc cos ciekawego, wiekszosc utworow dodatkowych ma wiecej rokowego charakteru lub po prostu zawiera jakas nietypowosc, bo typowosc jest najwieksza wada orginalnej czesci plyty, na plejke leci tytulowy tamburyniarz i ill feel a whole lot better z kociolka alternatywnego
I'm sleepy and there are better albums I'm going to
Too folksy for me!
Jangly Rickenbacker, second meeting with that Crosby guy. It's alright, i guess. Marked down for doing mainly covers; a lot of Bob Dylan's work. Mark added for not sounding like Bob Dylan. We'll Meet Again was a jarring listen.
Blah
I’m sure they were influential and there are a couple of nice tracks but overall there’s a softness that rubs me the wrong way.
Unfortunately uninteresting to me. There is a great choice of Dylan songs on here, but each of them is a big step down from Dylans own version for my tastes. The other material really doesn't grip me at all. I understand the importance of the band and I'm glad in a sense I listened through a couple of times, but I didn't find it interesting.
stinky
Didn't love. Felt like discount Beatles
2.5/5. It is a very listenable album, but there’s also so many albums from its time that do what it does better. admittedly doesn’t help that I’m a big Dylan fan so every time one of the Dylan covers came on I just wanted to listen to the original instead. But yeah, it’s okay and pleasant, but nothing I’d return to.
I don't remember the last The Byrds album that I was dealt being as dreary or as listless as this one. There's practically no variation from track to track, each of them occupying a similarly dull jangly rock space and seemingly on a sequential mission to outdo themselves in the dullness stakes. The title track in particular is an abomination. A proper mood killer.
Sånn passe
So now we come to the third Byrds album on the list. The song Mr. Tamborine Man brings back memories of a time when I was still interested in hippie culture and the girls that went with it. That was a long time ago, and the girls are no longer what they used to be. Beyond that, I couldn't care less about the album. I hope this was the last album by this overrated band on the list. 2/5
I should have respect for this album. I know why it’s important. But this really is nothing compared to the Beatles and Beach Boys.
I don’t think this is for me personally.
Not the worst album ever, not great either.
We have the Beatles and Bob Dylan at home. 2/5
An album of lacklustre Bob Dylan covers. 2/5.
Just OK.
Boring, totally fine, rock of its era. I’m sure it was a lot more exciting at the time.
Let's NOT meet again, Byrds.
Cute.
Entendi que é bem antigo (anos 60 e influências de beatles e dylan), porém não achei nada que me demonstrasse alguma empatia além disso, pelo contrário soou bem simplório (lógico se comparando com beatles)..enfim, poderia até ganhar mais, mas vou dar apenas dois...inclusive escutei dois álbuns e não saiu da mesma...enfim, passo, vou procurar outras coisas...
The kings of jangle - it’s hard not to feel optimistic listening to this era of the Byrds. The fact this is half covers knocks my review, but the excellence of I’ll Feel a Whole Lot Better balances it out.
Why?
Jesus this was slow.
I dunno man it's kinda too old, probably good then Will I listen to again: 4%
A couple of reasonable tracks, and you can see where it could go, but overall nothing ground breaking.
File this one under milk toast hippie bullshit. It’s painfully generic. I like a lot of what the Byrds and Gene Clarke put out but this one didn’t have anything that made me excited.
His voice was annoying
Not my thing at all
Like, I don't really hate it but I also don't really love it. I'm pretty familiar with most of this and I just don't fuck with melancholy, unless it's mellon collie. Jokes aside, it's fine and I would never ask someone to skip it if they were vibing to it but on my own, I'm gonna skip that shit.
tambourine man. that‘s it. 2
I do think it is weird to have to review an album with so many cover songs. I appreciate them adding "their" twist to these songs, but the lead singer is trying to emulate Dylan's weird nasally cadence on quite a few of the tracks and that is off-putting to me. I have always liked the song Mr. Tambourine Man, by Bob Dylan, and I think their harmonies really add something special to the track. I just wish they were panned to one side or the other to really fill the space. The twelve-string Rickenbacker guitar work throughout the album really add a cohesiveness to the album. The harmonies would be more impressive if I could hear them better. They really do shine on "You Won't Have to Cry" in the chorus but get muddied in the verse. I think there is a balance issue with the mix. This album is regarded as America's first true answer to The Beatles, and I just don't see that. This is not a bad album, but its full of covers! How can you compare it to The Beatles who were writing all of their own music and by the time this album came out, really starting to experiment and push the boundaries of music. A more accurate counterpart to the Beatles would be The Beach Boys.
This album reminds me of staying up late and seeing infomercials for CDs: *Smooth Voice* The sound of the 60’s. It was an era of change, reflection, and love. And now it’s all in one CD collection. Yes all the sounds of the 60s on one CD and for 4 easy payments of $19.64.
Just so meh. 60s sounds washing over my ears
Pretty meh.
I have only heard the title track before and its the best song of the album to me. That song itself is very mid to me and the album as a whole isn't really my style. It didn't get me interested in any way.
Musical tone that lingers near country, but diverts into a more psychedelic sound. I can hear the inspiration
Pretty dull stuff
Tired and twee. Boring and without any bite. Technically amazing but thats about it. American version of the hollies in sound but nowhere near in terms of songs and breadth.
So vanilla. Just a bunch of covers. The best ones are covers of Bob Dylan, who's versions are vastly superior
Was fine
Listening to The Byrds I hear echoes of Tom Petty and other musicians they've influenced. For me, I'd rather listen to Dylan or Petty or the Beatles, but I can respect what they did in music. I reached my limit with the 12 string electric by the 5th song. Still all of this is a musical education.
Meh
When the only memorable song on your album is a cover that’s not a good thing.
This album presents a curious paradox for me: It is an objectively good piece of work that fails to generate any personal connection. The music, a repetitition of jangly songs, feels like a stuck record, offering a perfectly reasonable soundscape that simply doesn't resonate. It's an odd and disengaging experience, as it provokes no reaction beyond indifference. In fact, the only song that manages to break through the mundane with a jarring lo-fi quality, sounding as if it were recorded on a phone, and yet it's the one I can tolerate. Ultimately, this is an album that leaves me wondering why on a personal level. I was going to give it a 1 but I hold that prize for only the most worthy!
Hi!! I don't think cover albums should be on this list!!
Some very good songs, classic '60 vibes!
Melodic. Harmonious. Pleasant.
Some boring shit from the byrds, the only interesting part was the stereo panning on the intro to Mr Tambourine Man. 2.3/5
An album of Bob Dylan covers that sounds just like the early Beatles but with American accents. Okay.
I feel the same way about this one as the last Byrds album I listened to. It's fine. It's very jingle-jangly guitar with dudes singing in harmony. It's all very blandly 60's sounding. Whatever.
Do you know that meme? "Mom, can we have Bob Dylan?" "No, we have Bob Dylan at home." Well, this album is exactly that!
This didn't do it for me. Tambourine man is a great cover, the guitar riff is brilliant. But all the others just felt ploddy. None of them seemed to have any interesting instrumentation and any that had a riff, they just stopped playing it as soon as the vocals came in. I like folk rock, I like Dylan (who wrote most of the songs), I like British invasion music that according to the wiki the byrds where acclaimed to be alongside at the time. But I couldn't get into this.
Part of this list seems to be learning that the Beatles were actually very ahead of their room me by virtue of listening to the dross they were competing with. Don't know how an album of twee Dylan covers represents the first American album to compete with the British invasion but it must have made the British band's sound even better. Sounds dated even for the sixties. It isn't unlistenable but very dull, 1.5.
Oh my favorite band again...... I find it really weird that over half of the songs on this are covers, or not written by them. Naming the album the title of someone else's song is strange to me . The sound is ok, but they are trying to be the Beatles or Dylan. Of the original tracks, "I'll feel a whole lot better" is the best 2
In the jingle-jangle morning, I'll be headed the other way. While the first couple of tracks might be the best expression of The Byrds' thing (chiming guitars, vocal harmonies, and lyrics chock full of 1960s preoccupations), before long it feels less like magic and more like a formula that set in a direction I'm not interested in.
I was looking forward to listening to this, especially with the one-two opening punch of "Mr. Tambourine Man" and "I'll Feel a Whole Lot Better." But I didn't anticipate that the rest of the album would be slight variations on the same sound, and that sameness made things drag after a while. Well, "I'll Feel a Whole Lot Better" is still great at least.
So incredibly 60s bore.
Pretty inoffensive - nothing that really stood out or blew me away, but also nothing that I didn't like.
everything about this struck me as British 60's rock but its just got that sound, its like the lead singer just had a good cry or something. I couldnt get into it, even Mr Tambourine Man, which is supposed to be their big song is just nonsensical whimsy.
Maybe I just wasn’t in the mood but I thought this album fucking sucked. “Hey Mr Tamborine Man” is awful and the rest of the album was boring nothing. I spent the entire album waiting for something interesting to happen and absolutely nothing did. Give me William Shatner any day
Very forgettable
Snelle inhaal review #11: The Beatles, The Kinks, The Who, The Animals, The Zombies etc. klonken inderdaad allemaal identiek op hun debuutalbum, The Byrds waren echter Amerikaanse copycats en waren dus zeker influenced door die bands, niet andersom. Verder niet zo boeiend album.
2.5⭐️/5 [07.26.2025] 01.12.2026
Better than the first byrds album but not saying much. Very hippy beat
eeh
It was decent. The only standout track for me was "It's No Use". Favourite Track(s): It's No Use Least Favourite Track(s): All I Really Want To Do
Jangle pop, I found it middle of the road.
Essential only as the precursor to much better music
decent, the songs are kinda generic I feel like I've heard them all before. nothing incredible or terribly offensive, just a pretty okay pop/rock album.
I know it’s an important album but I found it pretty boring
Sånn passe
Ægte 60'er nostalgi, starter med Mr. Tamborine Man. Hyggeligt. Bliver lidt kedelig i længden.
Whilst im sure this was on the cutting edge at the time, i think it sounds very twee and thin now.
Pretty boring.
This one didn't impress me all that much. I get it, the Byrds are supposed to be an American response to the Beatles. And they had a major impact on popular rock music at the time. But listening today, most of the songs are just kinda meh/bland. On top of that, most of the tracks are covers or reworkings of other songs. Which I guess was a big part of the point, to create something different by combining two styles and genres into one. If anything, this album was consistent. Pretty much all the songs sound alike given a lack of diversity in instrumentation and the heavy use of group vocals. I found It's No Use to be a good change, but even that wasn't that much different than the rest. It was honestly a little annoying to hear the same musical aspects on every track. The album was probably weaker as a whole as a result. Honestly, nothing here was actively bad. It just wasn't that good or interesting sounding to me. It's hard for me to appreciate it now, 60 years later, since it's so far removed from its context. Perhaps it was much fresher feeling to listeners then. Instead, it just seemed rather mediocre. Overall: 2.5/5
Heard some songs from The Byrds before. Bob Dylan covers album 2/5
I've said it before but it often applies. If it's the 60s and the Beatles and Beach Boys are making music... why bother if this it the best you can do?
It's not the beatles
Rating: 5/10 Meh.
It sounds like the Monkeys, or the Beach Boys. It’s awful.
I like the concept of the Byrds way more than the actual execution of this album. Shimmery, jangly guitars, vocal harmonies sure. But these songs aren’t memorable at all. Dylan did Mr Tambourine Man better and Tom Petty’s cover of Feel a Whole Lot Better is far more memorable. Won’t be back to this album, nothing here to get excited about.
I expected to like this more. This overall felt slight and I’m not really taken with their voices. There’s no tension or urgency anywhere. The production and mix aren’t doing them any favors–the harmonies, one of The Byrds selling points, often sound muddy. The opening cover is nice enough.
Jangle jangle
This is an inbeteeen album. It follows Dylan’s art and preceded CSN beauty. This music become annoying after a couple of songs.
Psychedelic Folk Rock copying their style from the beatles, copying their lyrics from Bob Dylan.
Not a bad album for the time. Not for me, but not bad.
Every song on the original track listing felt identical. And after a while, it just started to sound like a wall of noise.
I kind of get why this is included in the list because it's influential or something like that but damn, it's soooooooo booooooooring. Every song sounds the same and it's just plain wack.
Heard the title track a bunch but none of the other ones. Not for me.
I sometimes wonder why they didn’t do better in America. W mean we were fine with other British bands, the Beatles, the Stones etc. I think it’s because the others didn’t use phrases like “Bloody well right” which brings out our inherent xenophobia. I give it a four. Three for the music and one for the nostalgia
Not really digging this album. it sounds generically like lots of things from the 60s but doesn't have the interest that I get from bands like The Who. meh, boring.
Ok
Some good stuff here, but it all sounds the same and gets pretty boring. Also, WAY too many Byrds albums on this list!
3eme album avec D. Crosby proposé avec le générateur, premier album avec ce groupe. Cet album n'est pas plus intéressant qu'en solo, ou avec Stills and Nash, à part peut être le son de la guitare 12 cordes. Pas désagréable donc mais je n'y reviendrais pas. Aucun morceau ne m'as marqué. =>2/5
I don't like this very much. They Byrds were more IMPORTANT than they were GOOD, in my opinion, especially in these pre LSD years.
Bit samey. I don't think there was any outstanding tracks.
fine - definitely 60s
THIS is how the Byrds started?? Covering Bobby D?? It's a bit of a cheat way to get big, but the cover is rather good. The sound is driven by the interplay of guitars while lush vocal harmony blankets the rest of the bands instruments. While the album is good listen and obviously a big influence stylistically, it doesn't need to be on this list while three of their better albums are 2.5/5
didn't grip me
In the jingle jangle boring, am I right?! I am mostly or partly right. These are not Bob Dylan's best songs, especially the ones that Bob Dylan didn't write. Compared to the first half of Bringing It All Back Home, which was released a few months earlier, these takes are wimpy. "I wore my fringe like Roger McGuinn," Edwyn Collins once sang, "I was hoping to impress. So frightfully camp, it made you laugh." Well, this is all fringe: floppy and wispy with nothing to hold on to. Tellingly, Jack Ashford, the tambourine player for the Funk Brothers, wouldn't make his most significant contributions until the following year: I Heard It Through The Grapevine; You Can't Hurry Love; Going To A Go-Go. This is the dancing spell that the Byrds (and even Dylan) fail to cast. Now that sound is something both limber and robust. The Byrds even manage to take the groove out of the Bo Diddley Beat on Don't Doubt Yourself, Babe - there's a tambourine, but no dancing spell! Although I enjoyed some of the record innocently enough (I Knew I'd Want You), ending on a terrible version of We'll Meet Again is throwing down the gauntlet. I'll meet the Byrds again, but probably not this record. 2.5 This bored the arse off me. Every track is the same smothering cloud of tambourine, jangly guitar, flaccid drums and edgeless vocals. Mr Tambourine Man is a great, great song and this zombified version is somehow widely preferred to Dylan’s. I always find it an alienating shock to contemplate that. What is wrong with people? Dylan wrote four terrific verses. The Byrd reduced it to one verse and they sang that one horribly; their decision to castrate its last line by pausing before ‘I promise to go under it’ and squaring out the phrase where Dylan barrelled ahead with magic effect to create the song’s best moment is incomprehensible. I can’t even talk about what they did to We’ll Meet Again. The Byrds are monsters. 1.5/5
Pretty light stuff. Granted, the early-to-mid ‘60s isn’t necessarily my period (I mean, with the exception of jazz, Stax, Motown, some really cool Country, etc. etc.). It’s not their fault that the studio made them record so many covers. However, given the lack of strength of the originals, I’m not sure a whole album of originals would’ve been so much better.
Fine and cute but nothing too special. I understand that cover versions were extremely significant particularly in this era for spreading songs and inter-promoting artists etc. but honestly I’d just rather listen to the originals most of the time. Favourite was I’ll Feel a Whole Better, which is an enjoyable original.
Bland
This is alright, tickled me to hear Americans singing about Merthyr and Newport
What a disappointment. If this is America's answer to the Beatles, you guys didn't understand the question.
just didnt do anything for me
A couple of nice enough songs and very inoffensive and easy to listen to, however, not much of note
Grand.
Nice enough but better 60s music out there
It good but I definitely won't listen again, not for me
So this is a cover album? What's that doing on this list?
Thirstier than a fish in a desert.
All these songs sounded more or less the same; like an extended Tambourine man. Not bad, would give 2.5 if I could, but gonna round down as I am unlikely to revisit.
You can see the Beatles' influence, but in all its essence, this record does not bring anything new to the table, except for two or three catchy guitar riffs. I wouldn't say that the tracks are bad, but they do not spark any interest. Production-wise, the bass guitar stands out a lot.
Just because something was commercially successful in the era when there only like 5 bands and all they did was rip each other off and smoke the mildest pot and think they were tripping doesn't mean it's essential listening. As much as I like the Rickenbacker jangle, this doesn't hold up well at all. Sounds like if the Monkees were a Dylan cover band.
This album flew by, but not in the good way. More in the background music way. I prefer any other Byrds album to this, it's painfully alright music. Really only had 2 standout songs for me, the title track, and "Here Without You". I like the Byrds, but this album is just not very good
Nothing about this would make me want to listen to it again
nothing stands out to me sound wise but the cover does go hard
The music from this era just feels so dated.
Kinda repetitive.
Gear: Abyss DIANA MR Artwork: 📸🐟👁️ Production: 🔊🥴🔊 Music: 🎶👨🎤🎸🌅✨🤷♂️ Rating: 🐦🦅(🦆)/5
This one was on the right listen, I think I liked one or two songs but nothing that is going to make it into the rotation
Not really my thing. Had to be there probably.
Ei napannut sitten yhtään.
Pretty good mix and recording
Very pleasant if a bit samey. Good background music I would say.
Hm, Hippie-Mucke. Bei der Gitarre musste ich sofort an The Searchers und Needles And Pins denken. Oder war es Use The Man von Megadeth? :) Ansonsten ist der Titeltrack natürlich ein Smash Hit, der Rest plätschert aber ohne große Unterschiede so vor sich hin.
all the songs sounded the same
Not inspired to make any comments
Too much jingle jangle for my taste.
I do like their version of “Mr. Tambourine Man” but that’s the first track. After that it’s generic 60s pop that I’m increasingly becoming exhausted by. 2/5
If not for the fact that this was released 1965 I wouldve thought that this was an album of all covers I guess it doesnt sound that bad for 1965 but we live in the modern times now, gramps, it doesn't hold up anymore
Never really been a huge fan.
Bra 60 tals rock, kivoga melodier
This sounds pretty decent for a few songs but man it starts to drag. 2/5
Cool 12 string intros to many songs. A bit droney for my tastes. Decent vocal harmonies, which always add to the quality of a tune or album for me.
Great band from the 60’s. Classic hits.
2.5 fine not unpleasant but boring
Boring
They don't seem differentiated from each other much which makes the whole album feel pretty samey fairly quick and thus fairly forgettable.
I'm so goddamn tired of Byrds albums
I honestly just didn’t see what was so special about them. To me they didn’t have any sort of oomph that made them incredible. I recognize that they were some of the first to sound like this however I see so distinction and nothing that truly impressed me.
2.5 ehhhh
This was fine, I didn't like it anywhere close to as much as an earlier album from The Byrds on this list that had some heavy Gram Parsons, but this was fine.
Pretty boring
Not the most awful album in the world, but it comes over as a bit derivative to say the least. Obviously strongly influenced by the Beatles in places, with lots of songs about relationships that seem a bit forced. The more psychedelic tracks save this from a single star rating, but it's not quite enough for 3 stars. We'll Meet Again was an awful end to the album and left a bad taste.
I get that this was influential and the harmonies and the 12-string jangly guitar but the album is one hit and a whole lot of meh filler.
It makes me want the harmonization of the Mamas and the Papas. I like the instrumentation but everything else is kind of meh, hasn't held up over time. 2.5* rounded down, I think.
It Bit Byrd Shit
Not my thing really
I honestly thought this was boring and everything sounded the same
When I'm in the "Blandest band of all time" competition and my opponent is The Byrds: 😱😱😱 Swear to god, these guys are to music what a corrugated steel shack is to architecture. It's like if you took The Beatles and removed everything that makes them interesting. Featuring the world's least interesting cover of "We'll Meet Again" ever conceived. Actually sort of an achievement to make that song not sound emotionally moving in the slightest. Not a fan.
Nice but bland is my summary of the Byrds entire ouervre
Just a bit boring
Pretty forgettable songs apart from the Dylan stuff but it sounds great! One to revisit
If the color beige was a band, it'd be The Byrds. Four of their best songs are Dylan covers; and to be fair I like their versions better. That being said, their songs are like wallpaper, you kind of forget about them.
Tambourine kennt man
Битлз и Боб Дилан в одном обличии. Это и есть дебютник птичек. Если бы я не слышал уже у рамках данного марафона на что они будут способы в дальнейшем, поставил бы 1, а так чуть повыше.
Liked Song Mr. Tambourine Man
Mr. Tambourine Man is the debut album by the American rock band the Byrds. It's a folk rock album consisting of covers and originals written primarily by Gene Clark. It is the band's most successful album and has been recognized as one of the first folk rock albums - where electric guitars and rock music is melded with smart, folksy lyrics. The titular single was released before the album to universal acclaim and propelled the album up the charts in the US and UK. This important folk rock album from a US band challenged the dominance of UK bands like the Beatles and inspired many other acts to try their hand at similar sounding music. I enjoyed this album, especially the titular single. Although the recordings are showing their age, it's the classic folk rock music that sounds timeless. Fans of rock will like Mr. Tambourine Man.
This is like the Beatles crossed with Dylan, with a lot more jingle-jangle and harmonized singing. It's not unpleasant but it's not something I'd play either. Why are there so many albums full of cover songs on this list? The darker, more ominous ones like "Here Without You" and "It's No Use" are a smidge better. It's easy to listen to but you can also forget it's there, middlin.
Some good ones but mostly a bunch of yawners. Again an album with mostly covers doesn't feel worthy of the list. The psychedelic sound of the guitar was different but I found myself drifting off and not paying attention to the music. Maybe it was the drugs I didn't take but should have.
Evidently this was our best answer to the British invasion? The guitar work is nice in parts but otherwise it's a handful of forgettable singles and couple Dylan covers. It's fine, I guess but really nothing special. 2.1 stars
The Wes Andersonification of Bob Dylan?? Jeg må tilslutte mig Claus skepsis - det er ikke dårligt, men hvorfor lytte til dette når Bob Dylan allerede har lavet 1/3 af albummet? 2,5! Måske en 3'er på en solskinsdag! Min niece ville elske den!
Har aldrig rent faktisk hørt den her før, men jeg var 100 sikker på at jeg skulle være kontrær Byrds elsker. Men nah, det er sgu lidt kedeligt, og alle Dylan numrene er bedre i Dylans udgave. Forstår godt hvorfor der er en scene i I'm Not There hvor Dylan kalder The Byrds for "that groovy cover band"
Folk-rock, nice. En hel debutplade hvor halvdelen af sangene er Dylan covers? Arghh..
Sleepy music 😴
I’m at about a 2.5, but I’m giving it a 2 because they didn’t even write the songs that were actually decent.
I get it, they're famous, and highly influential in the days of early folk rock, but it was kinda meh.
Bit hippy, folksy hassled by the man for my taste though I like "I'll feel a whole lot better"
fine
I think the Vera Lynn cover tanked this one for me.
Fine.
Que decir. Antiguo. No impresiona. No explota. Nada.
All this music sounds exactly the same to me besides tambourine man. Every song the same guitar sound. No special tracks besides the first and maybe second track.
Felt like an SNL skit with Christopher Walken yelling “I gotta have more tambourine”
Not fun
Every song was similar. They never changed their harmony at all. It was all redundant.
Well the sound is iconic, but there is little merit in becoming famous by covering Dylan
Appreciate it was influential, especially the (great) sound. But feels samesy other than the variety from the Dylan songs, not a repeat listen for me.
The musical equivalent of Teflon. No matter how many times I tried to pay attention to this album, I just couldn't. It is just so damn bland. 1.5 stars.
So this is what it would sound like if the Beatles spent the early 60s playing Dylan covers……the jangly guitars get kind of irritating after awhile.
This is so dry. Half of these songs had me thinking that I know them, but there's a better version of it out there. If you were deep in the 60s and desperate for good music, this might be great. But like almost everything back then, it's a little too dated now unless it brings good lyrics. And this does not.
Not my thing, tends to all blend into one, Mr Tambourine Man has become annoying, I've heard it so much. Probably the best song on the album though.
2/5. Yeah just kind of boring, especially since it's a lot of covers. Just feels lazy, despite this wonderful 12-string guitar that everyone keeps talking about. Like some fun songs but just okay, maybe just wasn't in the mood but that was my experience. Was interested in most of them, the hits were fine though.
Man, The Byrds are pretty damn boring. I like some songs on one album, and everything else I've listened to by them has been nothing. I'm probably just not super into folk a lot of the time. My favourite song was Mr. Tambourine Man.
Mid
Is this just a list of everything Byrds? Because “bonuses” aside, this if the 5th album I’m getting from them here. And let’s make it clear, they ain’t no Beatles, Led Zep, or Pink Floyd.
Nice sorta what u expected from knowing the single off it
Ok. So The Byrds are The Frey to The Beatles Coldplay. A band doing an extremely similar thing, yet somehow even more less interesting version, to an overrated band.
I guess not all of the music from the 60s was good. The breakup songs on this album have big incel energy. Chimes of freedom was the best track, but only by merit of ots message, not music
I know it’s influential, but with all this time between then and now, it kinda sounds like 32 minutes of Spinal Tap’s Listen to the Flower People. I did like the prolonged Bo Diddley bit quite a lot though, that was cool.
So jangly. So 60s it hurts. Not my thing anymore.
So very bored
Cover album
folk rock années 60 générique 5/10
Brani Preferiti: - "Mr. Tambourine Man" Note: Bella cover. Il resto non fa per me.
Bit too same-y for me, not much exciting stuff
I'm sure it was one of those that was great, pivotal and groundbreaking when it came out. Now, it's closer to parody than original to my ears - most of the tracks all sound the same, and I can only think about The Thamesmen from Spinal Tap.
2.5
Fine, but that's about it
Está bien, pero se me ha hecho un poco largo y casi todas las canciones me sonaban iguales, además de recordarme a los beatles (mis enemigos públicos)
Nope
2/5. While this album wasn’t bad by any stretch of the imagination. I simply wasn’t too big a fan due to their clear Beatles similarities.
The B sides of the boring Beatles albums
bland
Just far too jangly.
snooze
You can really tell this is a debut album as they definitely don't sound as sharp as I'd like. Throw in the fact that they are just changing the sound of Dylan's work, I feel like they don't deserve the credit for even the title track. I like The Byrds and it wasn't terrible but just sounded like a much inferior Beatles album
I'm glad I didn't live in an era where this was good or groundbreaking music. Pretty boring album that I have no desire to listen to again.
I don’t find many songs distinct, all pretty similar in sound but not bad. Frequently jangly with harmonized vocals.
The title track is good but the rest is fairly uninteresting
Just some basic jangly 60's pop rock. Really not too much to remember from it. Semi catchy songs with very simple concepts. 4/10
Bad covers
A wanna be Beatles album that leveraged a Dylan song. Definitely didn't deserve the fame and sales they got 2.5/5
The band John Lennon don’t want you to know about The Beatles hate them! 2.5/5
Boring and samey. Mostly well sung, just not interesting. The version of "We'll Meet Again" is perhaps the oddest single song on a pop album
Alright album, nothing in this album is extraordinary
not for me.
Not for me but I can see why some people would like it. Too boring for me.
2/5 impressively bland
Copied their style from the beatles, copied their lyrics from Bob Dylan (and others). Not as good as either, not even close
Ok album
Couple solid classics, but also drags on at times. Lots of same-y sounds, which is a lot over 13 songs
I didn’t really enjoy this album. Not sure why this generator has had me listen to the title track on different albums almost within a week of each other. I think I just don’t like folk very much.
Didn't really do anything for me, sorry Byrd boys
Fine but prefer Michelle Pfeiffer's version
Old doo-woppy classic rock. Nothing peaked my interest.
This album exists. I listened to it. That's all. 2/5
Meh.
McGuinn’s, Clark’s, and Crosby’s voices blend together most excellently. That’s all I can say positively. This album lacks both soul and authenticity. I’m not sure if it’s due to the way the music machine wanted the sound, singing other people’s songs, or something else, but a group couldn’t sing with less passion. There’s maybe 10 seconds of lead guitar on the whole album that has a modicum of grit. I could be making a similar comment about today’s influencer culture or airbrushed hunks/starlets on magazine covers. The product is vapid. I listened to all three Bob Dylan covers to compare. You may hate Bob’s voice, but you cannot deny that you feel passion emanating from the speakers. This album is like the happy meal toy that you get an excited for when you open the box and then you throw it away with your empty chocolate milk bottle on your way out.
Pretty boring outside the single. Some of the songwriting was painful.
Boring
Interesting to hear again, but my, how it sounds dated. Classics retain their relevance. This doesn’t seem to be one of them.
vähän tylsä mutta ei huono. Dylan-biisit toimii hyvinä poppikappaleina
Forgettable.
È un album che migliora verso la fine. Infatti per me "It's no use" è l'unico brano degno di nota. Farei partire l'album da questa traccia (14) perché il resto prima è noioso. "All I really want to do" mi piace.
An album full of folk song covers (mainly by Bob Dylan) played and recorded in an early The Beatles style by American The Byrds. Pop/rock with some folk influences, making it sound like a aforementioned Beatles, but with late Lennon's lyrics. The question that this record being on the list brings - is it good enough, or innovative enough to be here? The music sounds very outdated right now, and to make it worse, it wasn't original at the time as well. It's just the americanised version of british folk pop/rock bands. And the slightly unusual part of the album is that the lyrics are taken from Dylan's discography, which makes for a unique combination. But by saying that, it's not enough to make it special or good. It shouldn't be on the list at all, in my opinion of course.
I am listening to this right after Fifth Dimension because I'm slacking behind and I get to be choosy about what I pick to listen to haha. With that context, all the dislikes about that album which came out the year after this are allll magnified on this album. It's even more unoriginal, covers, copied sounds, and the songs on this album are standing out even less. The album as a whole seems much less exciting and is actually making me want to listen to Dylan instead of these covers of his music.
Nothing special here
This was kind of fun, but nothing that stuck with me later other than the breakup /funeral song that was “we’ll meet again.”
This was tough slugging. It's one of those albums that I'm sure was cool on release but it now sounds old and way past its best before date.
This really isn't a sound for me
Didn't do much for me, very folksy and the 12 string is nice, but it's lacking something extra like clever lyrics or some good instrumental solos. Honestly listening back to a few songs again and most of them sound the same. That might change after a lot more listens, but that ain't happening.
Prettifying everything in sight, these sensitive souls never met a song they couldn't wrap their harmonies round but plenty they couldn't wrap their brains round.
Besides the titular track, I didn’t find much on this album that engaged me at all (and only that one track because it’s engrained in my consciousness.)
This is fine, perfectly pleasant to listen to but not a whole lot more than that. Jingly jangly and a bit dull, takes a lot of the energy out of their covers and don't add much else. 2/5 for me.
same as the last but not as good 2.5
Not my jam.
Best Song: Mr. Tambourine Man. It has the one trait that really helps these old classic rock songs succeed: familiarity. Worst Song: All I Really Want To Do. The lyrics just seem like that kind of predatory whining of a "Nice Guy". Overall: Very many very short songs which do little do differentiate themselves. I'm sure it was influential, but today it's just a bit boring.
Not my thing
Ovo nisu Marty i obitelj 😡
I was really disappointed with this one. I knew the big hits and liked them but the other tracks seem to show they were a one-trick-pony. It's a very impressive trick but a bit dull listening to a whole album of it.
It's OK. They are very good at playing Bob Dylan songs. But where would they be without them??
Terrible
"Hey, want to listen to a Beatles album but like one of the early, early ones that's all covers and also you won't know any of the songs?"
Meh... 60s folk rock. No thanks.
An OK cover band I guess.
Boring
Cute. Surprisingly melancholy. Couldn't really tell the difference between the songs after Mr Tambourine Man.
Not bad
Muy hippie.
So they knew - they released the album knowing their only covered song would be their huge hit. Not one of the folk-pop tracks they wrote themselves that fills the rest of the album that blurs into 1. They knew. Dull
Meh
Canciones sin carácter, destacan mínimamente “I knew I’d want you” e “It’s no use”.
While I liked this album slightly more than the first one thrown up by The Byrds, I still find it mostly uninspiring with no tracks that really hook me. I toyed with giving it a 3, but that's only relative to their other music. I just don't enjoy this as much as the majority of the other albums.
60s melodies have their place. I wouldn't be able to listen to this album all in one sitting.
An old-style that is hard to listen to for the first time in 2021. It's fine, and I'm sure it was great back in '65. 2/5
Meh, old generic
Not my kinda tune
I think I've heard this album before. Not the biggest larry BYRDS fan
I can't imagine a scenario where I'd choose any of these covers over the Dylan originals? But, the rest of the album is fine enough, apart from the cover of "we'll meet again" which is terrrrrrrrible.
Absolutely get how much of an influence they had on their contemporaries and many bands to follow, and many of the tunes are quite catchy, but overall I think I must have heard these songs too often growing up. I also find them a bit tinny, kind of thin in their sound, and honestly just wasn't very interested as it played.
Initial thoughts * Mr Tambourine Man - More familiar with the Dylan version and I think I prefer it. * Spanish Harlem Incident - This is not great. I thought the Byrds were known for making Dylan's stuff more accessible but seems like the singer seems like he's really aping Dylan and not in a good way. After that I didn't pay super close attention. Jangly vaguely folky soft rock. Can hear some 12-string sometimes. Some good songs but I'm not in love with their particular style or performances. Some factoids I came across * Apparently two songs (title track and "I Knew I'd Wanted You") were actually recorded by the Wreaking Crew (great doc if you haven't seen it) before the Byrds insisted that they actually play on the record. And you can really hear the difference on those two tracks. * Also an interesting tidbit, a book I'm reading about the history of the electric guitar (Play It Loud) claims the Byrd were an influence on Dylan going electric. Bottom line: Just sort of meh. I'd rather just listen to Dylan himself - though I really like Dylan's electric period so thankful if this played some small part in that. Those are great records. Definitely and influential record, can see why it's on the list from that perspective.
Also unexpectedly fun 👍 Few too many tracks, though! Fav new track: Don't Doubt Yourself, Babe
Pretty much every song sounds the same. Same instruments, same key, same tempo, same tambourine jangling away at the same rhythm. I guess if you like the Byrds, you'd really like this a lot.
How many fucking albums by the Byrds must I get?
Saccharine versions of Bob. Not for me Clive.
while musically good, with decent lyrics and good harmonies i find the album lacking any sort of 'soul' or feeling
Ugh. I hate this era of folk music. Now, I know who to blame. I can't unhear "We'll meet again"
Like a cheap Beatles/Dylan copy.
yawn
This album is alright - very 60s type music and mostly not my thing. 5/10.
Ik dacht in ieder nummer wel een Tambourine Man te horen.
Nudy
3 Alben von den Byrds sind zu viel, Younger Than Yesterday hätte gereicht und hätte der Band geschmeichelt, dieses Album fand ich bis auf den Titelsong echt öd.
Tal vez no era el día para escuchar éste Disco. Me dormí.
Not a huge fan, can definitely tell they are trying to compete with the Beatles, who I do not like, so the style of music is not tripping my trigger.