 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (1)big ...and 193 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2614125 Today 4 Topics 127542 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
you know that guy john lennon that was in the beatles? did his solo album "Walls & Bridges" miss getting the remixing/remastering treatment yoko gave virtually all the music he made after the beatles.. save for the ones recorded during his 'lost weekend' in which there are no yoko mentions. this is too good of an album to not get the enhancement that double fantasy got. why are people averse to remastering/remixing.. esp. if it sounds BETTER and is better suited for the audiotech. we use today? I don't get that. as far as the beatles catalog is concerned, are there any plans to remix/master them ?? a lot has developed since 1987, and Let it Be naked and Yellow Submarine songtrack can't hold me over like that. nahmean? 11 |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Nope, I don't think any remastering or remixing of that album has gone down since, like... the begninning of the CD era. Unless I'm missing something. Shame, it's a great album, as are all of John's much maligned post-Imagine records. I'm definitely not averse to remastering... I've been championing the cause for decades. I even sent a passionate e-mail to Capitol during some Abbeyrd.com remixing movement a long time ago. I'm a BIG fan of the old school ''sound'', including The Beatles... the chime and choppiness of the guitars, the sound of the drums and the way they were miked, the tone of the bass, the way the voices have that weird retro intangible... and I think all of this can be retained even when modernizing it. Yellow Submarine sounded spectacular, regardless of what 50 year old fans think/thought. I can't STAND some of the stereo mixes on the current official Beatles CDs. Not to mention some of them have had their balls snipped off. I'm assuming 99% of people that have heard Harrison's classic If I Needed Someone are really only familiar with it from the '87 CD... that's a damn shame, because it sounds like total pussified shit compared to some of the hard rocking mono versions. I've got hundreds of Beatles bootlegs, and you can find a signifigantly better version of every track in their catalogue on bootlegs... yet, it's still hard to find a perfect one. Mobile Fidelity Soundlab have worked wonders on some of the albums, Beatles for Sale especially... brings out a new clarity in the guitar lines. But the vocals are usually unsatisfactory with those. They dont' have much to work with, but I'm sure they've got some good shit in the vaults... it would be difficult (and daunting) to get in there and clean up the Beatles catalogue... but not impossible. Every other fucking halfwit band has had wonderful work done to their old stuff. I've yet to hear a remaster that DIDN'T improve upon the original material, or didn't stay true to the original sound and vision. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
And there have been faint rumblings from that prick coattail rider Aspinall that a ''major project is about to get underway''. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that there will be redone Beatles albums by 2006. How can they not? Everytime someone buys Sgt. Pepper, rips off the plastic and expects to get some nice, colorful, informative packaging to justify their 20 dollars, they instead get... NOTHING. Never mind the inferior sound quality to the original pressings... that were released 4 DECADES AGO. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
beatles are shit |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I like some songs but I wouldent call myself a fan |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I think they should bring ringo up in a lot of the mixes.. it's almost as if the beatle's personality determined his position in the mix.. where can one get a lot of these bootlegs? I really watn to get the unedited let it be session tapes.. to watch the unraveling and that.. (I read a bbc article about a year ago .. one that mentioned the let it be naked album plans.. that said there was a completely 'new beatles album on the shelf' I'm guessing from those sessions.. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I've pissed in the same toilet as the Beatles...much to the disgust of the pub owner who had it mounted as a decorative feature. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Wait till they find, theres no need!!! theres no neeeeddddd ... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Do you have soulseek? My username is revolverjgw, I've got tons of bootlegs on my computer right now, and tons more resting on CD-R, pretty much everything worth hearing. I've got the 20 disc Get Back set on here right now. You can also get stuff from suprnova.org and that sharing the groove site. I agree about Ringo. On a lot of the mono mixes, his drums have more thud, more power... makes the music more driving. That guy is an underrated drummer. BIG NEWS A boxed set of all the US albums is coming out in November! Yes, a lot of people are complaining about the fact that it's the US albums... but I think it's a nice stopgap until the true UK remixes come out (probably next year). A nice treat for the hardcore fans, and some of the older Americans that grew up with these mutated albums. Even better... the songs are going to be remastered (I don't know about remixed... don't know much at this point) with 24 bit, and each CD will have the mono AND stereo mixes on it. Better sound, it'll give us a taste of what's to come. Nice big 70 page booklet and the Beatles Story docu-album, too... nice deal. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I was amazed at how expensive "the white album" is. fuck that, I'm not paying that, even more so because all the living members are gazillionaires already. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
The MSRP prices are completely insane, especially considering the unbelievably pathetic packaging, horrible sound quality (compared to most of the vinyl) and total lack of any juicy documentation or bonuses. The Red and Blue albums cost 40 dollars plus tax up here. Sgt. Pepper generously provides an interesting enough essay by George Martin, looking back on the album and discussing how it holds up to to the present... too fuckin' bad the essay was written 17 years ago. I think it's time for an update. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i've recently became quite a beatle fan myself whats with them having different releases for the us and uk? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the usual reasons |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
good music scares Americans. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
everyone should like the beatles... they are the original catchy band... whereas... elvis? not as catchy |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
not as thin |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Elvis is very different, can't really compare them. I like Elviseseses music. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Im'a huge beatles fan |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Yeah right on about the sound quality thing, my dad has an original pressing of sgt. pepper and it sounds loads better than the cd i have heard. It has more balls, the cd version sounds really cluttered. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Definitely, yeah. The CD sounds castrated. Ever hear the 1999 remixes of Sgt. Pepper's title track, Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, With a Little Help from My Friends, and When I'm 64? (from Yellow Submarine Songtrack?). When they remix the entire Pepper album, we're in for a sonic treat. The Pepper intro absolutely rocks, makes the Pepper CD mix sound paper thin (it is). Big drums, heavy bass, stinging guitar, crystal clear vocals... wonderful. Stays true to the 60's production... soul and sound totally intact, just sounds better. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
elvis's stuff isn't as heard, though. He's had lots of catchy stuff, but his stuff is in heavy rotation with a select few tracks. The beatles stuff is pretty much open season. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I love the twickenham studios film. Love the whole look of it all. Ringo was great in goodnight! On of my favorites. He has a nice speaking voice, too. Also, Love his thuddy snare. I really love here comes the sun, too. Harrison out did himself on tht one. Good production on Martins part, as well. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
beatles yes, good |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I'm not sure I understand what is meant when you say these mixes 'castrate' the original songs? you mean it just thins/flattens them? where did you hear about this boxed set? and why do you make a distinction btw the US and UK remasters? (is it just the differing tracklists?) and will albums like the Past Masters.. ones that include a lot of great singles/b-sides get this remastering treatment also.. is the 1998 Lennon Anthology the best/most recent mixes/masters of the walls and bridges tracks? is that where to go to get the best/most updated versions of them? and is that a good comp to buy oneone |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Thins, flattens, that's exactly what I mean. It's hard to fathom why they did such a poor job on the '87 CDs. I'm not even going to try. But almost invariably, Beatles on vinyl sounds farrr better than the CDs. And there's lots of older, better mixes floating around, including the mono Sgt. Pepper, which most people consider to be vastly superior to the stereo version. In Pepper's case, the songs actually change quite a bit in the mono mix... some are longer, some are sped up, some have new measures and guitar licks... it's interesting. It sounds far thicker and meaner. If I Needed Someone is one of the best examples of aural castration... the mono Rubber Soul has a rocking, driving beat, and the stereo CD version has Ringo's drums buried under the other instruments and shoved awkwardly into one speaker, by itself. And the 63-64 Beatles CDs sound particularly pathetic. What SHOULD be shimmering Rickenbacker on A Hard Day's Night is buried under grime. There's some good stereo mixes that bring out the good stuff, but I think they can improve it... hopefully they can get them all remixed next year. As for the John Lennon Anthology... well, it's not really aptly named. Just like the Beatles Anthology, it basically just compiles tons of unreleased material. You won't find many polished and complete songs. There's some sound quality improvement in places, though... alternate mixes... same goes for The Beatles Anthologies. Even though you get older, incomplete versions of songs, often they sound BETTER than the ones on the official CDs, because they had some work done on them... or they were just left as they were, raw and genuine. But no, if you're looking for shiny sounding replacements for complete songs, don't get that, unless you like swearing in the middle of songs, sour notes, giggling, and sudden breakdowns. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
ahh ok.. and where did this November-of-this-year reissue news come from? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the giggling on And Your Bird Can Sing from Anthology 2 made that one of my favourite songs. The proper version just doesn't sound right to me without all the laughing and silly voices. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yup |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
More specifially, . This gets updated whenever they learn something else... don't know much yet, but it looks like November 16th is the day. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
at any point during those 'get back/let it be' sessions do the beatles, as a group, do "all things must pass"? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
..and after a long time of not owning it (mostly because of its price.. nevermind the fact that I'd regularly pay twice as much for multiple cds) ..I bought "All Things Must Pass" today.. and it's just as great as I imagined it would be.. I'm guessing this is his best album? I listened to some of his later, near-willbury-era music and it was really horribly depressing to hear a beatle make the music I was hjearing (I can't imagine what RINGO has been up to since 1970.. and I've gotten a pretty good idea of what mccartney has been putting out recently, .. and I know to avoid) .. john's catalog really doesn't disappoint in the long run (I recently finished buying/taking in his whole solo run without the 'sometime in NYC' album - which I plan to check soon).. but is there any other george album that I should check that came out after 1970? ..and are his Electric music and wonderwall albums available under $40 anywhere? 11 |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I bloody love the beatles, but i really hate the excessive panning. It's like they found a toy and played with it to death. Totally fucks with my perception on headphones. I get a headache on some tracks. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yup.. I know what you mean.. there's a producer called Madlib.. who I'm sure you've heard of by now.. who I think might've discovered panning in 2003.. and he's bent on showing the world his new discovery |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
haha, i love the "vocals in the left ear, rest of the band in the right ear" panning... makes it really easy to sample the vocals :D |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
All Things Must Pass, minus the live shit, is one of the best albums ever made, ever. By far his best, though his next 4 or 5 albums all had some good stuff (and some bad). After that... regrettable. He was never a master songwriter, and he proved it by fizzling out quickly on his own, but he was the best third wheel ever. I really like 33 1/3rd, Crackerbox Palace being my favorite solo George track. Ringo's first album is phenomenal, a must have, and his second is OK... after that, it's generic and inoffensive. Not bad, but not interesting at all. I hate their gimmicky stereo seperation, too... the '99 remixes fix that. And I usually only listen to mono mixes of their albums anway, especially on headphones! I can't stand having an entire orchestra in one ear, and voices in the other. George Martin preferred working in mono, and I'm pretty sure for the most part, The Beatles did too, but stereo was all the rage back then. But it's fun to mess around with their mixes, there are tricks you can do to totally eliminate vocals or instrumental tracks. Cool version of Rain, guitars and drums totally eliminated, leaving only John's sex=ay voice- . |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Try listening to them on Grado's. I almost fell over my equilibriam was so off balance. Panning is fine for mixing and playing with perception (putting things in your peripheral scope), but not hard panning. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
If you just listen to the left channel of Blue Jay Way off MMT, you get a pretty cool instrumental harmonium track. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
George Harrison said that when they got stereo monitors put in at Abbey Road he couldn't understand what they were thinking - it just made everything sound a mess! i still like the hard panning on the beatles mixes, gives them a recognisable character/sound. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
don't you think the All things must pass album does the "wall of sound" technique to a fault? it sounds very cluttered and claustrophobic also, is it my imagination, or isn't there a version of that title track that is just George with a tremeloed electric guitar.. not the one that's on anthology 3.. or am I making that up? I can't imagine a ringo album being that good.. cmon now! ;) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
You know what, I DO kind of like those silly mixes, as long as I'm not listening on headphones! It makes my ears itch and tickles my ribs. The Wall of Sound... I really like it on that album. It bears little resemblance to the Beatle sound, but I think it works for George's vision... dead serious, deep, broad scope... skeletal, spare arrangements wouldn't do his bombastic songs justice. Sometimes it's a bit oversaturated, but the Wall of Sound is one of the things that makes that album for me, in general. And I swear, Ringo's first album is great! As long as you like straightforward pop. John, Paul, George, Harry Nilsson, Marc Bolan, Randy Newman, Richard Perry... he had the best people working with him and some great material. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
oh john, paul, george are on it? are there any collabs on beatle solos that involve vocal contributions by featured beatles? does ringo's album have that 'going to carolina' song he was talking about on that Fly on The Wall thing? what paul albums are good? the only paul solo I plan on buying is the McCartney one because I LOVE that 'junk' song. musically it's one of his best.. and I love what he's saying in it.. is Ram good? I doubt I'll be buying any Wings etc look for me on slsk.. I want that letitbe movie! |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
i downloaded the Let It Be film once... can get it from quite a few places. think i may have got it from kazaa, before i deleted it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
how long is it? appx |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I consider Ram the best Beatles solo album. ''Ram On'' is one of his all-time best vocal melodies. Really, the whole album is loaded with great pop like that. I think it's SIGNIFIGANTLY better than ''McCartney''... it's basically a more polished take on that style of music, and the songs are more fleshed out. And I'm biased, because I think Paul had the best solo career out of any of them, by a wide margin. He harnassed his abilities far better than the others. McCartney, Ram, Band on the Run, Red Rose Speedway, Venus and Mars (horribly underrated), London Town, Tug of War, McCartney 2 (some very dated but very cool ''electro'' experiments like ''Temporary Secretary'')... I think they're all at least 4 star albums. There are some lame, bloodless efforts, like Press to Play and Pipes of Peace, and unfortunately, since it's not ''hip'' to like Paul's edge-less pop, that's the kind of thing people remember him for. And of course you have to go in wanting tuneful pop, nothing but. He obviously went in a different direction... no George preaching or John bitching, it's all pop. He gets maligned for this, but I don't see the problem... he was doing the exact same thing with the Beatles and nobody complained. His solo arrangements and musical ideas are way more interesting than John and Paul's, in my opinion. John, I swear he went out of his way to NOT be like Paul just to be a contentious prick... and as a result, squandered his awesome melodic talents. Let it Be is an awesome movie, and word is it's going to get a nice DVD re-release soon. I saw it at Suprnova.org the other day, check that place out... search for ''Beatles'' and there's TONS of awesome shit there. Tons. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
yeah, it's like paul had the silly melodies and the other three added the edge. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
john added the bitterness and grief... |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
interesting.. see I like john and george for the same reasons you seem to dislike them (not dislike, but not prefer) and I've felt that paul is annoyingly unaffected and "crippled inside" see, I love stuff like john's "gimmie some truth" and his mothers, cold turkeys and his torment and his letting you see everything and his working through whatever it was that was ailing him at the time.. it's much more interesting and it's something I can really connect with more so than say, 'when I'm sixty-four' (*douche chills*) john's yoko shit, public charades are pretty Hawthorne-effect[ed] and therefore pretty dubious as well .. but right now john's imagine, plastic ono, others are more relevant than they've been since they were written. also, that ambitious, overwrought george stuff is right up my alley... like "Let it Down," george harrison wrote that for me. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Who ever wrote "she said", I like him. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
that's john |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Well I think John and George's BEST work is better than Paul's. But they burnt out artistically really fast, especially George. One incredible album and then his load was pretty much blown. John's heart was usually in it, but I dunno... he was just totally different the John from the Beatles days, the John I remember him as. He lacked the Beatle stylistic recklessness... Paul, if you listen to his album track non-hits, kept that going a lot more. But it's six or one half dozen of the other, they all put out some brilliant post-Beatle stuff, and 99% of it is underappreciated or overly analyzed. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
