Beatles Remasters coming! 09/09/09

[Dave James]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9g24RQOl0g

There's also a second half of the audition available on YouTube in case you need more evidence.

Up over and out.

[Alexander]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E9g24RQOl0g

There's also a second half of the audition available on YouTube in case you need more evidence.

Up over and out.

Purple Chick put out the whole thing as well...

[Teasing the Korean]

The weirdest thing about the Decca audition is that George is practically the lead vocalist. Paul sings some leads in this bad faux-Elvis voice. John, who was the main guy in the early days, comes off like he's someone's drunken younger brother who they allowed to sing a couple of songs. The choice of tunes is bizarre (Sheik of Araby). There are only three Lennon-McCartney tunes, all pretty amateurish, even by 1962 standards. The drummer is not so hot either.

[Alexander]

The weirdest thing about the Decca audition is that George is practically the lead vocalist. Paul sings some leads in this bad faux-Elvis voice. John, who was the main guy in the early days, comes off like he's someone's drunken younger brother who they allowed to sing a couple of songs. The choice of tunes is bizarre (Sheik of Araby). There are only three Lennon-McCartney tunes, all pretty amateurish, even by 1962 standards. The drummer is not so hot either.

I noticed that too, that George gets a lot of face time compared to Paul and John. Like I said, it doesn't feel like they were taking it seriously. At all.

[felser]

The weirdest thing about the Decca audition is that George is practically the lead vocalist. Paul sings some leads in this bad faux-Elvis voice. John, who was the main guy in the early days, comes off like he's someone's drunken younger brother who they allowed to sing a couple of songs. The choice of tunes is bizarre (Sheik of Araby). There are only three Lennon-McCartney tunes, all pretty amateurish, even by 1962 standards. The drummer is not so hot either.

Yeah, I was stunned at how poor those Decca audition sides were. I'd have passed on them too. There were other groups in England who were very accomplished already, and the Decca sides seemed to show no potential to anything meaningful. As for Please Please Me vs. Revolver vs. White Album, it's apples vs. oranges vs. pears, not a matter of "better", but rather "different". Each had meaning in it's time. As far as the cause of musical advancement, remember that they weren't operating in a vacuum, but rather there were a lot of advancements going on around them (Byrds, Yardbirds, Stones, Kinks, Hollies etc.). The advancements by some of those groups were every bit as stunning as the advancements by the Beatles. If you consider 'Revolver' to be groundbreaking for 1966, what do you call "Eight Miles High", which came out at the same time?

Edited September 20, 2009 by felser

[A Lark Ascending]

The advancements by some of those groups were every bit as stunning as the advancements by the Beatles. If you consider 'Revolver' to be groundbreaking for 1966, what do you call "Eight Miles High", which came out at the same time?

I'm only mildly interested in 'ground-breaking' - it's an issue of historical analysis. What's much more important to me is 'interesting, enjoyable, engaging' and both 'Revolver' and the Byrds music have that range of melodic interest, unusual effects, strange takes on existing approaches and great vocals to keep me listening....40 years later at that.

Maybe it's because I'm in my 50s, but I find the first two albums don't have a great deal of that sort of interest and the lyrics are so aimed at what we'd later call a teenybop market that you have to really suspend your disbelief listening to them. I don't even hear much rawness there. In spite of the Decca examples, I'd imagine the Beatles would have sound very different in the Cavern or Hamburg. Those first two albums sound to me like very tamed versions of their existing approach. Which was undoubtedly necessary - learning how to work in a studio, developing their songwriting with the assistance of someone who could point them down different avenue etc all helped make what came after possible. Without that they'd probably have been the Dave Clarke Five.

Put a historical hat on and try and imagine those records as first heard - especially by teenagers - in 1962/3 and I can see exactly why they were so exciting (after all, those teenagers had never heard 'Revolver'). It's a bit like listening to the Original Dixieland Jazz Band (who, like the Beatles, were performing a music taken largely from a different culture) - I can understand why they created such a stir as the First World War came to an end but I can't feel anything in the records. Whereas Louis Armstrong a few years later has done so much more that the shivers can still go down my back 80 years later.

[Cliff Englewood]

I don't know about you John but I am going to be 59 in a few weeks so the heck with him.

Okay, a question. What is Revolution 9 supposed to be about? I've read some explanations about Yoko and John fooling around and so forth and I suppose once I pick up the MacDonald book, I'll get a better answer.

We were listening to the White Album today and my wife couldn't believe Good Night was a Beatles song. A site I recently discovered had this quote by Paul (circa 1994) about it:

"I think John felt it might not be good for his image for him to sing it, but it was fabulous to hear him do it, he sang it great. We heard him sing it in order to teach it to Ringo and he sang it very tenderly. John rarely showed his tender side, but my key memories of John are when he was tender, that's what has remained with me-- those moments where he showed himself to be a very generous, loving person. I always cite that song as an example of the John beneath the surface that we only saw occasionally... I don't think John's version was ever recorded."

Re "Revolution 9", get the MacDonald book, he has 5 pages on it, seriously. He also makes a very good point about how this was the most avant garde piece of music to ever reach such a large number of listeners, ie it's on a Beatles record.

I love "Good Night" BTW, great tune.

You really need to get "Revelution In The Head", don't wait until your Birthday. :D

[Brad]

You really need to get "Revelution In The Head", don't wait until your Birthday. :D

It's already on order

All right, now don't all of you jump over me but I guess this classifies as a Beatles newbies question on these things but is the Beatles Anthologies you're all referring to the ones on Cd or DVD. Also, I've seen various references to Purple Chick but what is that?

[Teasing the Korean]

As for Please Please Me vs. Revolver vs. White Album, it's apples vs. oranges vs. pears, not a matter of "better", but rather "different". Each had meaning in it's time. As far as the cause of musical advancement, remember that they weren't operating in a vacuum, but rather there were a lot of advancements going on around them (Byrds, Yardbirds, Stones, Kinks, Hollies etc.). The advancements by some of those groups were every bit as stunning as the advancements by the Beatles. If you consider 'Revolver' to be groundbreaking for 1966, what do you call "Eight Miles High", which came out at the same time?

Agree 100%. Lots of interesting stuff started going on pop/rock between, roughly, mid-65 and mid-67 (before and after those dates too). Because rock was relatively new at that time, all of the better artists had to draw from inspiration outside of rock music. Regardless, the jump between "Please Please Me" and "Revolver" is pretty amazing, as is the jump between the "Surfin' Safari" album and "Pet Sounds."

[JSngry]

In spite of the Decca examples, I'd imagine the Beatles would have sound very different in the Cavern or Hamburg.

Yeah, me too. It takes a while to get used to being in a "sterile" studio and feeling the same vibe as a loud, smokey, sweaty club full of people who are feeding you back the energy you're feeding them.

The Beatles - Some Other Guy (Live at the Cavern, 1962)

I tell you, the main musical, as opposed to psychological, difference between this & the Decca tapes is Ringo.

[JSngry]

Yeah, here you go: BEATLES RADIO SHOW 1962 [with pete best } :

Ringo tightened the whole thing up. Big time.

[Matthew]

Put me down for Revolution In The Head, sounds interesting. What's a good overall book about the Beatles, I have the Anthology in mothballs, do I need to get that out and actually read the words? I just got it for the pictures....

Brad: I think it's the book people a talking about, and Purple Chick are bootlegs of the Beatles catalog that were better than the "official" cds that were out at the time. Dr. Ebbetts is another famous boot series of the Beatles.

Edited September 20, 2009 by Matthew

[Teasing the Korean]

Anyone interested in the Cavern period should pick up the BBC sessions. Some sessions pre-date the first album, and they run as late as 1965 or so, but there is a lot of good early stuff that eclipses the early albums in terms of rawness and energy.

[Cliff Englewood]

Put me down for Revolution In The Head, sounds interesting. What's a good overall book about the Beatles, I have the Anthology in mothballs, do I need to get that out and actually read the words? I just got it for the pictures....

Again sorry to harp on but "Revolution In The Head" is a very good one stop shop as it just has loads of info. and it's a lot more than just interesting, I mean some of his footnotes are just mind blowing.

However this seems to be another good one as it's "official/authorised", he actually was hanging out with them for ages and was a friend, or so it seems.

This the cover of the updated one that I picked up over here.

Anyone interested in the Cavern period should pick up the BBC sessions. Some sessions pre-date the first album, and they run as late as 1965 or so, but there is a lot of good early stuff that eclipses the early albums in terms of rawness and energy.

I've heard nothing but good things about the BBC sessions, don't have it myself though.

[Brad]

I have it on the way.

[Alexander]

Anyone interested in the Cavern period should pick up the BBC sessions. Some sessions pre-date the first album, and they run as late as 1965 or so, but there is a lot of good early stuff that eclipses the early albums in terms of rawness and energy.

I've heard nothing but good things about the BBC sessions, don't have it myself though.

Yes, the BBC sessions are great. Lots of covers they never did on record (Paul doing "That's All Right," George doing "Nothing Shaking But The Leaves On The Trees"...all four doing "Shout").

[JETman]

I must admit that I think I enjoy the earlier albums more then the later ones, and to have them in the original mono mix is a plus in my book. The first five cds seem to have a sense of fun to them that got lost in some of the later albums, where the weight of the expectations, at times, made the Beatles later work strike me as strained. That's not to take anything from their greatness however...

And there you have it. That's why everyone who can afford it has jumped all over the mono box.

The first two albums are only of historical interest to me.

HDN, BFS and H are hugely enjoyable but...

It's Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt P (with reservations), the White Album and Abbey Road + the singles album that are the big atraction for me (I've not heard 'Let It Be' as an album ever!...should be remedied in the next couple of weeks).

Mono, stereo, cylinder disc, download...doesn't enter into the equation for these ears.

Ah! now here is where tastes differ! Please Please Me to my ears is one of the greatest power pop records of all time, I love it! I always return to PPM when I need a jolt of rock 'n roll.

Listening to these box sets has caused me to "rediscover" early Beatles. Those first 5 albums are definitely loaded with charm and great R 'n R for me again. However, this rediscovery does not deter me from the opinion that their later albums are their best musically --- Rubber Soul on up is where it's at for me. I am still kind of befuddled as to why many Beatles fans find Revolver to be their best offering. Can this really be said about an album that has "Yellow Submarine" on it?

"Revolver" IS their best album. Yes, it has "Yellow Submarine" (which I think is a perfectly charming track), but it also has "Taxman," "Love You To," "Tomorrow Never Knows," "She Said, She Said," "I'm Only Sleeping," "Doctor Robert," "Eleanor Rigby," etc., etc. "Taxman" has to be the best opening track since, well, "I Saw Her Standing There" on "Please Please Me"! (It still amazes me that only three years separate those two albums. And notice that both start with a count-in!)

You say this as if it's a given!!!

Mileage varies, as they say.

[AllenLowe]

just a sonic observation - been playing Revolver, the stereo version, on my system - seems to be lacking in mid-range (between 500-600 hz) - anybody else notice this?

[J.A.W.]

I must admit that I think I enjoy the earlier albums more then the later ones, and to have them in the original mono mix is a plus in my book. The first five cds seem to have a sense of fun to them that got lost in some of the later albums, where the weight of the expectations, at times, made the Beatles later work strike me as strained. That's not to take anything from their greatness however...

And there you have it. That's why everyone who can afford it has jumped all over the mono box.

The first two albums are only of historical interest to me.

HDN, BFS and H are hugely enjoyable but...

It's Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt P (with reservations), the White Album and Abbey Road + the singles album that are the big atraction for me (I've not heard 'Let It Be' as an album ever!...should be remedied in the next couple of weeks).

Mono, stereo, cylinder disc, download...doesn't enter into the equation for these ears.

Ah! now here is where tastes differ! Please Please Me to my ears is one of the greatest power pop records of all time, I love it! I always return to PPM when I need a jolt of rock 'n roll.

Listening to these box sets has caused me to "rediscover" early Beatles. Those first 5 albums are definitely loaded with charm and great R 'n R for me again. However, this rediscovery does not deter me from the opinion that their later albums are their best musically --- Rubber Soul on up is where it's at for me. I am still kind of befuddled as to why many Beatles fans find Revolver to be their best offering. Can this really be said about an album that has "Yellow Submarine" on it?

"Revolver" IS their best album. Yes, it has "Yellow Submarine" (which I think is a perfectly charming track), but it also has "Taxman," "Love You To," "Tomorrow Never Knows," "She Said, She Said," "I'm Only Sleeping," "Doctor Robert," "Eleanor Rigby," etc., etc. "Taxman" has to be the best opening track since, well, "I Saw Her Standing There" on "Please Please Me"! (It still amazes me that only three years separate those two albums. And notice that both start with a count-in!)

You say this as if it's a given!!!

Mileage varies, as they say.

I agree. Opinions presented as facts and all that jazz...

[Brad]

I must admit that I think I enjoy the earlier albums more then the later ones, and to have them in the original mono mix is a plus in my book. The first five cds seem to have a sense of fun to them that got lost in some of the later albums, where the weight of the expectations, at times, made the Beatles later work strike me as strained. That's not to take anything from their greatness however...

And there you have it. That's why everyone who can afford it has jumped all over the mono box.

The first two albums are only of historical interest to me.

HDN, BFS and H are hugely enjoyable but...

It's Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt P (with reservations), the White Album and Abbey Road + the singles album that are the big atraction for me (I've not heard 'Let It Be' as an album ever!...should be remedied in the next couple of weeks).

Mono, stereo, cylinder disc, download...doesn't enter into the equation for these ears.

Ah! now here is where tastes differ! Please Please Me to my ears is one of the greatest power pop records of all time, I love it! I always return to PPM when I need a jolt of rock 'n roll.

Listening to these box sets has caused me to "rediscover" early Beatles. Those first 5 albums are definitely loaded with charm and great R 'n R for me again. However, this rediscovery does not deter me from the opinion that their later albums are their best musically --- Rubber Soul on up is where it's at for me. I am still kind of befuddled as to why many Beatles fans find Revolver to be their best offering. Can this really be said about an album that has "Yellow Submarine" on it?

"Revolver" IS their best album. Yes, it has "Yellow Submarine" (which I think is a perfectly charming track), but it also has "Taxman," "Love You To," "Tomorrow Never Knows," "She Said, She Said," "I'm Only Sleeping," "Doctor Robert," "Eleanor Rigby," etc., etc. "Taxman" has to be the best opening track since, well, "I Saw Her Standing There" on "Please Please Me"! (It still amazes me that only three years separate those two albums. And notice that both start with a count-in!)

You say this as if it's a given!!!

Mileage varies, as they say.

I agree. Opinions presented as facts and all that jazz...

Sounds like just an opinion but I do, imho, think the triumivirate of Rubber Soul, Revolver and Sgt. Peppers are the best. Of course, just my opinion

Edited September 20, 2009 by Brad

[AllenLowe]

I can't follow all these copy and paste arguments.

[Matthew]

I can't follow all these copy and paste arguments.

Darn dude! You don't need to follow the cut and paste!! You can read minds, so read those instead of the board!

[kinuta]

Maybe I'm in a minority but I'd rank Hard Day's Night as among their finest records. All the songs are classics with the exception of I'm Happy Just To Dance With You. My other contender is Rubber Soul , again a string of brilliant songs that I find even more enjoyable than Revolver, if that's possible.

[AllenLowe]

[

[Alexander]

Maybe I'm in a minority but I'd rank Hard Day's Night as among their finest records. All the songs are classics with the exception of I'm Happy Just To Dance With You. My other contender is Rubber Soul , again a string of brilliant songs that I find even more enjoyable than Revolver, if that's possible.

I'm certainly not trying to imply that their other albums are anything less than enjoyable. On their WORST day (much of the second side of "Beatles for Sale") the Beatles were making music that by any standard is still excellent. That's part of what makes them so amazing. They really had very few clunkers. They were smart enough to know when something wasn't going well ("That Means A Lot", "If You've Got Trouble") and to cut their losses. With the possible exception of "Leave My Kitten Alone," the Beatles ALWAYS selected the BEST songs and the BEST take. The "Anthology" is nothing like Dylan's "Bootleg Series" where a good portion was as good or better than the released material (why, oh why were "Foot of Pride" and "Blind Willie McTell" cut from "Infidels"? What was Bob thinking? Why was "Call Letter Blues" cut from "Blood On The Tracks"?).

"A Hard Day's Night" is a landmark recording, by any definition. Certainly AS MUCH of a landmark as "Please Please Me" had been and "Rubber Soul" and "Revolver" were to be. It marked the first time the Beatles had ever released an LP of all original material. It marked the ONLY time the songwriting team of Lennon/McCartney had an entire LP to their credit! It also marked a great leap forward in terms of songwriting ability. It is on this albums that the Beatles entered their "modern" period (their previous two albums, great as they are, are more dated than the music on "A Hard Day's Night." The music on this album stands up with their later work). It's not surprising, for example, that on the "Hey Jude" LP, "I Should Have Known Better" and "Can't Buy Me Love" don't sound at all out of place alongside "Paperback Writer," "Rain, "Lady Madonna," etc. When I was a kid and I would listen to that album, it never even OCCURRED to me that there was a two to five year gap between some of those songs. I don't think that would have been the case with "I Saw Her Standing There" or "I Want to Hold Your Hand."