Beatles Remasters coming! 09/09/09

[Jim R]

If it was always popular on the radio, that was usually enough - no need to own it.

I hear you, although there may be a lot you never really got to hear more than once (if that).

If you've gone this long without them, don't cave in now! I admire anyone who has successfully avoided the Beatles!

I admire people who don't cave in, but I see no reason to avoid the Beatles.

[7/4]

If it was always popular on the radio, that was usually enough - no need to own it.

I hear you, although there may be a lot you never really got to hear more than once (if that).

Around here - being NYC and Philly - in the early '80s the local radio stations had A-Z weekends where they would play everything.

[clifford_thornton]

I've heard some things here and there but never owned any, either.

Will the Plastic Ono Band reissues include some extra Ornette or John Tchicai tracks?

[Rooster_Ties]

And the Andorrans will have no compunctions whatsoever about including mono mixes, outtakes and other such goodies...

[JSngry]

[Jim Alfredson]

Yeah yeah yeah, but when are they gonna release Kind Of Blue again?

[Cliff Englewood]

Beatle website link.

[JETman]

Beatle website link.

If I'm reading this correctly, we'll also get the mono mixes where applicable. So does this put the whole "we're still only getting the stereo mixes" complaint to bed?

[7/4]

from todays NYTimes:

"Apple Corps and EMI announced on Tuesday that the much-postponed remasters would be released on individual stereo CDs and in two boxed sets — one stereo, the other mono — on Sept. 9, the same day the Beatles edition of Rock Band, the music video game, is scheduled for release."

[Alexander]

from todays NYTimes:

"Apple Corps and EMI announced on Tuesday that the much-postponed remasters would be released on individual stereo CDs and in two boxed sets — one stereo, the other mono — on Sept. 9, the same day the Beatles edition of Rock Band, the music video game, is scheduled for release."

I just want to know: How damn much are these boxed sets?!

[JETman]

from todays NYTimes:

"Apple Corps and EMI announced on Tuesday that the much-postponed remasters would be released on individual stereo CDs and in two boxed sets — one stereo, the other mono — on Sept. 9, the same day the Beatles edition of Rock Band, the music video game, is scheduled for release."

I just want to know: How damn much are these boxed sets?!

Smells an awful lot like 500 bucks (for the two) to me!

[Aggie87]

from todays NYTimes:

"Apple Corps and EMI announced on Tuesday that the much-postponed remasters would be released on individual stereo CDs and in two boxed sets — one stereo, the other mono — on Sept. 9, the same day the Beatles edition of Rock Band, the music video game, is scheduled for release."

I just want to know: How damn much are these boxed sets?!

I haven't seen pricing on the boxes yet, but the individual CDs are available for pre-order at Amazon UK for £8.98 for the single discs, and £15.98 for the two double disc sets.

[Big Al]

LONG POST WARNING

Just letting the accounting brain work for a minute here:

1) Who comprises the market for these reissues? Us Beatlemaniacs would like to think that it’s a vast majority of them. But as has been pointed out, CD sales continue to fall, downloads/streaming are up. Sure, there is a new generation of Beatles fans all the time, but that generation belongs to the download/streaming generation. They couldn’t care less about packaging, extras. So yes, the market is out there, but how willing are they going to be to spend money on these upgrades?

2) The answer to that question would be the result of the answer to this question: how much effort should be put into making the mono mixes available? Casual Beatles fans will be happy with just the stereo mixes, and most of those “casual” fans are of the download/streaming generation. Case in point: my son got me one of The Capitol Boxes for my birthday this year. Being a Beatles fan himself, he promptly ripped the STEREO tracks to his mp3 player.

3) If the mono mixes are made available, what is the most cost-efficient way to go? Remember, EMI is in this to make money and nothing else. Artistic integrity, original packaging, etc etc etc... all well and good as long as it doesn’t negatively affect the bottom line. So, how do you do it? Append each mono mix to the stereo mix like The Capitol Boxes? Why not? They’d all fit perfectly. So why not do it like that?

4) Because of all the singles, B-sides, EPs, and other songs that didn’t make it onto the proper albums. I can tell you right now that were EMI to try THAT route, THEN you’d have to go back to the format of stereo on one disc, mono on the other.

5) Ultimately, there are two groups: Beatlemaniacs (a fickle bunch, to say the least, who will gripe about every imperfection (real and perceived) and either not spend the money, or spend the money begrudgingly and then post on amazon.com how horrible every single disc sounds and don't waste your money); and everyone else. I think EMI is targeting everyone else while trying to appease Beatlemaniacs as best they can. This, IMHO, is the smart move because everyone else will likely be happy about the releases while the Beatlemaniacs (who can't even agree amongst themselves the best way to reissue this music) will find new and unusual ways to look a gift-horse (or at the very least a $10 horse) in the mouth.

The only conclusions I can come to in this is the following:

1) Capitol saw a void that needed to be filled: upgraded Beatles CDs, faithful to the original UK albums.

2) Capitol recognized that there is a market out there for the mono mixes, but not every Beatles CD buyer is going to be interested in those mixes.

3) Simultaneously, they also recognized that those who ARE interested in any mono mix WILL want them all.

While I think that it would’ve been great to package them a la the Rhino 2-CD Elvis Costello re-issues, I think that would’ve been cost-prohibitive because there will be a much bigger pressing of Beatles CDs than Elvis CDs, therefore raising the cost of each disc. Plus, given that the rights to the Beatles songs are WAY more expensive than the Costello songs, AND the assumption that EMI has to pay TWICE for both the stereo AND the mono of a single song, making all of these available as 2-CD sets might actually cause EMI to lose money on this whole extravaganza. I may be wrong in my assumption of the cost of these songs, but it seems to me that, sound issues aside, the real issue holding up any Beatles upgrade has been and will always be about money. This is the only reason I can think of why there won’t be any outtakes, unreleased takes, etc (I’d love to have that alternate take of “Tomorrow Never Knows” on the Revolver CD). So, assuming all of this is true, a stand-alone mono box actually makes sense because there won't be NEARLY the number of pressings for this as there will be for the stereo mixes.

Me personally, I’m likely going to buy it all: stereo discs and mono box, simply because I couldn’t stand the original issues and all I have now are the Capitol Boxes and the Purple Chicks, and would like to be able to own these properly.

In other words, bring on September 9th!!!

[Hot Ptah]

I have come to the realization that this reissue of the Beatles albums will be the event which cures the world economy. Consumer spending, primed by the nearly universal purchase of these Beatles sets, will explode to unimaginably high levels as everyone in the world simultaneously gets back into the habit of compulsive spending, and never goes back to the fear and frugality of today.

The Beatles will be forever known more for ending the worldwide recession of 2008-09 than for their music, or for anything else.

[A Lark Ascending]

I think EMI's strategy is more cynical than that. They've rested on their laurels, not feeling any sense of urgency, assuming that an extension in copyright will protect their assets. Suddenly that seems far less sure. So, belatedly, they are trying to put something together that will look so attractive it will beat off the competition.

I assume the video game thing is to try and win the younger audience who might then buy the CDs. What chance Frank Sinatra or Nat King Cole, the video game?

It's a bit sad because EMI were very early in the compilations game with these:

These came out in the summer of 1973. I never had the first but got the second for Xmas in late '73. It became the soundtrack to many a late night Mah Jong game in my university years and my introduction to the Beatles on record (though they'd been a constant presence on the radio since the early 60s).

Edited April 8, 2009 by Bev Stapleton

[Aggie87]

Out of curiousity, how did the title of this thread get changed? I didn't change it myself, and it kind of renders my initial "One after 909" comment immaterial now.

I don't see the purpose in changing something like that, just for someone else to make their own commentary - that could have easily been made in the thread itself, instead of changing my title.

Plus, the new thread title isn't completely accurate - these are remasters, not just re-releases.

Edited April 8, 2009 by Aggie87

[WorldB3]

Big Al,

I still think considering that the average Beatles album runs less then a half hour and CD's can go up to 80 minutes that if EMI weren't in it only for the money they could easily put the Mono and Stereo version of Revolver on 1 CD with room to spare for the singles Rain and Paperback Writer.

As much as I really want to hear the mono version of Sgt. Peppers I don't want to spend 200 dollars for the privilege. Thats just me.

I assume the video game thing is to try and win the younger audience who might then buy the CDs. What chance Frank Sinatra or Nat King Cole, the video game?

I am still holding out for the Grant Green version of Guitar Hero.

[Use3D]

I don't see the purpose in changing something like that, just for someone else to make their own commentary - that could have easily been made in the thread itself, instead of changing my title.

Plus, the new thread title isn't completely accurate - these are remasters, not just re-releases.

I dunno, I think it got changed in a thread merge. I stuck remasters in there. Hope that helps.

[Christiern]

I have seen some interesting Beatles footage that will appear in a forthcoming television documentary series, On Record: The Soundtrack of Our Lives. It is hosted (and, I think, co-produced) by George Martin. Kevin Spacey will narrate. As far as I understand, it will trace the music as it developed in tandem with the technology of sound reproduction ("from Edison to the iPod"). I may know more later this month as I am meeting the producer (a madly enthusiastic Bessie Smith fan).

[marcello]

That sound very interesting, Chris. I'm glad that you're involved to tell it like it is (or was)!

[Big Al]

Big Al,

I still think considering that the average Beatles album runs less then a half hour and CD's can go up to 80 minutes that if EMI weren't in it only for the money they could easily put the Mono and Stereo version of Revolver on 1 CD with room to spare for the singles Rain and Paperback Writer.

Agreed, but only if they were putting just the single mix on the disc. Revolver with the singles in both stereo and mono runs slightly longer than 80 minutes. I know: I already tried it!

I never had the first but got the second... It became the soundtrack to many a late night... and my introduction to the Beatles on record (though they'd been a constant presence on the radio since the early 60s).

Same here!

[colinmce]

from todays NYTimes:

"Apple Corps and EMI announced on Tuesday that the much-postponed remasters would be released on individual stereo CDs and in two boxed sets — one stereo, the other mono — on Sept. 9, the same day the Beatles edition of Rock Band, the music video game, is scheduled for release."

I just want to know: How damn much are these boxed sets?!

Smells an awful lot like 500 bucks (for the two) to me!

Basically. Beatles CDs have been the most expensive on the market for 22 years, and I don't see that changing now. Seeing as how the 4-disc Capitol boxes retailed in the 80 dollar range, I think $200+ per box sounds about right.

[porcy62]

About alt. takes and similar, I got the Beatles's Anthology, (three triple albums, or double cds for you, poor digital outcasts), I mean, there could be ages of unrealesed stuff in the EMI vaults, but how much will it really worth? Unless one held a Beatles's course at Harward, I don't see any reason for a blast of joy, a part Hot Ptah's smart post about how the Beatles will solve the worldwide recession.

[rostasi]

About alt. takes and similar, I got the Beatles's Anthology, (three triple albums, or double cds for you, poor digital outcasts), I mean, there could be ages of unrealesed stuff in the EMI vaults, but how much will it really worth? Unless one held a Beatles's course at Harward, I don't see any reason for a blast of joy, a part Hot Ptah's smart post about how the Beatles will solve the worldwide recession.

Back in February, one of my Last.FM compadres offered me

"83 hours of the Beatles' Abbey Road sessions."

[RDK]

I reckon I will pick up Revolver and Abbey Road for the heck of it but it would have been nice to have the option to buy a single CD w/ the Mono release. Maybe Capitol will do a mono single CD release of Beatles 64 and 65.

I wish Capitol would do a third box set of the U.S. issues.

Really? They're all "butchered" and sound like crap in comparison to the Brit albums.

How many times can they peddle this same stuff to make big bucks off of it? Unless these remasters reveal very significantly new sonic pleasures, why is this a big deal?

I can just imagine that in the year 2309, the big news will be:

"1,892nd Remaster of the Beatles Albums Scheduled for the Fall!!!! Promises to Be More 'Real' Sounding Than the 2304 Remasters!!! Previously Unheard Snippet of John Lennon Singing Six Seconds of a Song From Mary Poppins to Himself On An Elevator The Highlight of the Set!!! Stereo, Mono and New HyperReal Versions of This Mary Poppins Snippet Available on the Deluxe Version of This Set For Only $25,000 More!"

Given that this is only the second time they've been released on CD (and the first time re-mastered in over 20 years), I'm not sure what you're talking about.

If you have not heard these albums in mono, you have not heard them as they're supposed to sound.

Well I prefer the stereo versions, but find the monos interesting "alternates." Not sure I buy the whole "this is how they were meant to sound" bs.