Beatles US Releases on CD

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 2:12 pm

Although I have to admit that this LP is two mono tracks each EQ'ed for fake stereo.

emswife · Post by **emswife** » Wed Nov 17, 2004 9:31 pm

Bob,

Got the same LP... consider myself very lucky to have this release... and on vinyl.

Who cares if it is fake stereo. It is the first Beatles LP release.

360dave660 · Post by **360dave660** » Mon Nov 22, 2004 2:47 am

So a few days after the release, are there any more verdicts? Outside of a desire to hear them the way they were in the US when first released to which I'm ambivalent, are they any better than what one could compile with the existing stuff ? My main interest would be if there would be better "sound definition" on my stereo when I play along to the existing UK released cd versions. It would be able to have recordings where one could better separate the rhythm guitar part/lead / bass from the drums & vocals. From my understanding of 60's recordings, how the US versions were mastered at Parlophone to be sent to Capital and how Capital handled/promoted/nurtured the Beachboys at the same time, the LA based EMI subsidiary does not have the greatest reputation on having done bang up jobs in the past. That being said, and I apologize for being long winded, Capital's "two-fers" with beachboys records and its Petsounds sessions were very well done. They were mono recordings remastered in stereo; not made to sound the way they were put out in the sixties. Moreover, for the '96 PS project, Capital,Brian Wilson & Mark Linnett used the original source tapes, or at least as close as possible whereso the '90 PS release relied on a later generation source.

Like most of us here, I'm a beatles junky and have pretty much all their stuff on cd/vinyl/DVD. I am curious about this one though, and some of the reviews on Amazon have not been stellar.

Thanks in advance.

PS : I played along to I saw her standing there this weekend off the Please Please Me UK cd and it is just super everytime in mono.

thanks,
dave

goldenoldie · Post by **goldenoldie** » Mon Nov 22, 2004 6:23 am

IMOH they're great. The sound quality is much improved - especially on Something New and Beatles '65.

britye · Post by **britye** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 5:05 pm

I got em for Christmas and they are great, the mono is cool just like when I first heard them on vinyl and on my Dad's am radio in his 64 Pontiac. But I gotta say I like stereo version better from a musicians point of view in that I can hear the bass and rhythm and leads ,drums and vocals separate. It's easier to listen to a specific part of a song to get it right. At least for me.

360dave660 · Post by **360dave660** » Sun Jan 23, 2005 11:14 pm

Yeah, I did get it and read a lot on amazon before buying it. Packaging aside, the stereo remastering is eyeopening because one hears a lot more of the guitar parts and its less buried in the mix. The only wash outs are I feel fine for example, where the reverb mix ruins the song. The liner notes and packaging could have been more. I hope little by little, EMI et al. will move to a more intimate approach to this catalogue providing far more in access to out-takes, demos, backing tracks. The packaging of "other great artists" from the sixties is often superior which is so ironic, IMHO, when one imagines the size of the Beatles' footprint on the sixties musically and culturally.

While much effort has been made since the mid nineties, I firmly believe that so much more could be done to provide "new" material and that there a large untapped market.

For example, if one examines how Elvis Presley's or the Beach Boys' catalogues have been marketed/re-packaged/remastered, unvaulted, one can only dream of what could be done with the Fab Four's opus.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 4:24 am

Elvis, yes, I agree. Beach Boys, not even close...

rictified · Post by **rictified** » Mon Jan 24, 2005 5:47 am

Anything that has not been released by The Beatles is worth a fortune, do you think EMI is actually going to give anything away by those guys? They do as little as they can possibly get away with and still make it look atractive. If they found one song that was recorded on a wire recorder from 200' away they'd put out a whole CD around it and soak everyone like they always do and make it sound like the second coming. The only thing they're dreaming of is all the money they can make, haha!

360dave660 · Post by **360dave660** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 6:02 am

Mark Linnet, Brian Wilson, David Leaf and Capitol have done a pretty good job with restoring the beachboys catalogue. The two-fers re-released/remastered in 2001 came with solid liner notes and about 25 songs a piece, including outtakes. Additionally, the Pet Sounds Sessions '96 box is phonically astounding and rich. Additionally, the liner notes/book that accompany that box meets the expectations of the types of music enthousiasts who purchase box sets.

Such an approach could be done for several of the beatles' records starting with rubber soul (while i'm convinced that the whole catalogue could be done well and expanded).

Anything by elvis sells and while a tremendous singer, a visionary in terms of the depth and bredth of his work, the King of RnR, etc, much of it was far spottier than so many bands in the sixties. Nevertheless, Jorgensen and co at RCA have found ways to keep it fresh and meet a market that wants more and more of a very specific topic.

EMI would not be giving anything away (a full bbc sessions for example), european concerts in '64-65 for example. Sessions for later albums. This sort of thing is done for so many other great artists and appear to be profitable that I think that EMI would make a bundle and would meet a real demand amongst beatle fans.

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 6:54 am

My reference is to the thousands of hours of rich BB outtakes and alternates which languish in the vaults of Capitol, including lots of REAL "Smile" material.

Where's all the unreleased stuff recorded at Brother in the '70s? And the songs for Dennis' unreleased second album?

Meanwhile Messrs. Love (a misnomer if ever there was one--he should be named GREED), Jardine, et. al., keep assembling oldies bands that sound worse and worse.

I think most of this stuff will eventually be seen and heard, although when is hard to say.

360dave660 · Post by **360dave660** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 11:43 am

Paul,
your point is well taken about Smile and indeed it would be wonderful if the same effort done for Pet Sounds (which as so many know Capital did not know what to do with and lead in part to its limited success).

I saw the brian wilson show last winter over here and have listed to the 2004 version of Smile and it remains a fantastic record.

Peace !

jingle_jangle · Post by **jingle_jangle** » Tue Jan 25, 2005 12:17 pm

Hi Dave!

It was a gas to get the SMILE CD for Christmas this year and pop it into the car stereo (better listening room that my home stereo!). So much familiar material re-done and re-organized. Some stuff never made it from the '60s till '04. I realized after a half-dozen listenings, that the stuff we've already heard in one form or other, is of really nice quality, and a lot of the seque or "new to my ears" stuff seemed weak somehow.

I was in the audience at the Hollywood Bowl in September 200 when Brian performed "Pet Sounds" live for the first time, and it was magic!