Re: Why No Beatles 2?
Posted by **Beatles Fan Robert** on Jul 19, 2017 at 11:23:56 AM:
In Reply to: Re: Why No Beatles 2? posted by **Only Sleeping** on Jul 19, 2017 at 12:08:02 AM:
***Mr. Beatlesfan Robert. If you have the money to waste on another regurgitated Beatles re re re re release more power to you. After hearing the Pepper outtakes & knowing a White Album is being worked on I'm glad they finally admit the vault is NOT empty. Every album had multiple takes of each sing especially Paulie who was a workaholic (God bless him!).
***As someone wrote not too long ago they need to do each album. Nuff said. Bye...... //00\\
***P.L.B. dig that.....
**Satire I presume?
**It was NOT a waste of money if I wanted to do an A to B comparison A valid exercise for any reasonable person.
**As for the new mixes, OK if anyone wants to spring for them. They may indeed be different, better in some respects, since they will sound way more contemporary. I think you may have missed my entire point.
**And here it is. When they were working on the re-masters they had an opportunity to remix at the same time. Because if later it was deemed to be an improvement, then do it then, not later It forces folks to shell out cash THREE times - and I repeat as I have contended before, the mono box set set the standard. And it still has the best fidelity. If you don't believe buy it and take it for a test spin. Also it WILL appreciate in value.
**The immediate obsolete one was the US Albums box set. What they did was use the 2009 remasters, including the mono tracks, and fiddle with them to make them sound like the Capitol Records albums, which is hind-site stunk. Believe me, aside from nostaligia, they should have been relegated to the dust bin of history. The Beatles to a man despised it.
**And there you go. That is all I have been trying to say, with a bit of vinegar and sarcasm tossed in.
**So whether or not you buy it (and to critique it you must) is your prerogative. Just don't slam a review because you disagree. I don't do that and I expect the same.
*I did not and do not intend to "slam your review" I'm just pointing out for me (no one else) it0a waste of money hearing repackaged. Not arguing about 2009 mono being great. For me it must contain material from the vault. I heard a brief part of a different take of I'm Only Sleeping on Ron Howard's Eight Days A Week.They have thode tapes wasting away in vaults. It's a shame. I want all takes of whatever songs they have more than 1 take of. I Want To Hold Your Hand? All .y Loving? It's just interesting to me how songs change as you go take after take. Peace
I think the reason for no further anthology albums is due to the fact that as George Martin said in 1995, no everything worth releasing is out there. As attested to by the fact that many of the alternate takes on the three double albums are simply not that good. There is a good reason why we have what we have. Martin (and the group) had a keen sense as to when to stop with the best take.
But for the completest who must have everything, OK, release the rest. I just think it may tarnish their legacy a bit.
- Re: Why No Beatles 2? - **imaginer** - Sep 5, 2017 at 10:34:53 PM
Home | Web Chat | Web Boards | Discography | Library | Quiz | Art & Poetry | Links | Store
Produced by Sam Choukri
Frequently Asked Questions
Last updated on Sep 5, 2017