This from Wiki:
"Prior to the Beatles' influence, record albums were of secondary consideration to singles ("45s") in mass marketing. Albums contained largely "filler" material (unexceptional songs) along with one or two hits. The Beatles rarely incorporated singles as part of their albums, thus defining the album as more important."
We've already talked about Lonnie Donegan and Adam Faith. I looked at the other two pre-Beatle UK monster pop acts.
Cliff Richard: His first album had one single, Move It (already over a year old) and none of his other contempory top twenty hits. His two follow up albums had no singles, despite a run of six consecutive top 3 singles, including 3 number 1's.
Likewise The Shadows first two albums were devoid of singles, despite them having a run of nine top ten singles, including four number ones.
I accept that The Beatles, with their enormous popularity and exceptional songwriting (and production) made albums far more economically viable (but that's only a guess) and therefore elevated their popularity, but this was not due to any innovation on their part. As Mairi said this may have appeared innovative to the US market, hearing a uk act for the first time, but it was just how albums were made here.
