If being an Audiophile can be reduced to simply striving for 'getting as close to the source material as possible' then I think there is a good argument to say that 60s pressings are equal to or better than 70s or 80s by virtue of many of the reasons people already stated:
1. More primitive/honest recording techniques/not over produced.
2. Care and love being put into not only the mastering and cutting process but also the pressing process (keep in mind that the 70s and 80s were grim years for quality pressess- flimsy discs).
Also its worth noting that although recording processes were more primitive, (2,3,4 and only very late in the 60s 8 track), cutting technology and techniques were pretty advanced. The techniques and cutting lathes used were pretty impressive and are favoured by some 'audiophile' companies today. Look at 'Electric Recording Company'.
As to whether there were 'Audiophile' presses, of course there were. They probably just arent marketed in the same way we look at it in 2017. There are plenty of vinyl records from the period which were released to show off 'amazing sounds'.
On a more commercial level look at DECCA's Full Frequency Stereophonic Sound (FFSS). This was a marketing tool for people to buy into the concept that sound quality was important. Sure, not all Decca pressings are 'audiophile' but some are amazing.
As for the Beatles, there are plenty of 60s (even early 60s) pressings of every album which sound amazing and which I would classify as 'audiophile'.. You just need to know what to look for.