By Terry Ott

Well, we trust y'all had a real good Thanksgiving, with the help of family and friends.

Today-Nov. 29-I saw something that had me shaking me head.

There on the AP newswire was a story about the Double Fantasy album that John Lennon signed for his killer Mark David Chapman, being once again up for sale, this time for $550,000.

And the reason I shook my head, is that one of the very first Beatles related stories that I ever did for a national newspaper in Canada, was on the sale of the album way back in November of 1998.

The seller, Gary Zimet, told me in an interview at that time that he believed the album to be worth at least $1 million, but had started bidding at a reserve of $450,000.

Zimet had placed a full page ad in Goldmine, calling the signed album the most important artifact in rock music history.

On that point, he may be correct.

Although my memory is a little hazy about specific detail, I seem to remember that Zimet told me that the seller of the album-and according to Zimet in fact the original owner of the infamous record-had some kind of health problem that forced a sale.

Apparently, the album was sold to a private collector for about $300,000, but I could not confirm that this was so.

So when I saw that the record was again up for sale by Zimet's Internet auction house, I wondered how many times this piece of plastic had actually been sold, or if it really ever had.

In the summer of 1998, Zimet had got the USA Today interested in a story about the album, and it was that story that bandied about the worth of $1 million.

Now, Zimet is saying that it is the perfect time to sell the album because he thinks that Beatles related material is undervalued.

An example being,Zimet said, John's scribbled lyrics to Nowhere Man, going for close to $500,000 last week at auction.

The way I see this thing is as follows: I am not of the mind that Zimet is some sort of Satan peddling the wages of sin-or as one Internet wag described as "pure evil"- but rather that everything in the world has a value. Even, and especially, this item.

Obviously, the album is an extremely important if not macabre piece of history, yet alone rock music history.

In a perfect world, this piece would be forever in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, or some other legitimate house of history.

But it ain't a perfect world, and money-even the blood kind-talks and bullshit walks, so I think this album will find a new private home.

And there's no doubt in my mind that the album will one day be worth that million that Zimet so covets, probably around the 25th anniversary of Lennon's murder, in 2005.

So before any of you go bursting a vessel over this whole sorry affair, recall what John always said: so many more people have made so much more money off the Beatles than the Beatles collectively made themselves.

In that spirit of those immortal Lennon words of wisdom, we all shine on. Even the scoundrels.

Just got me hands on the new Concert For George CD-it had been delayed here in Canada-and I think it is superb, to say the least.

It's obvious there was a ton of emotion at the show, and it bleeds through on this two disc set.

Faithtful, bang-on reproductions of Harrison's original arrangement of songs like Beware of Darkness, I Want To Tell You and Wah Wah trick one into thinking George just might have been in the mix himself. No denying he was there in spirit.

Eric Clapton, Jeff Lynne and Tom Petty all do yeoman work on this effort.

Billy Preston does a great job on Isn't It A Pity and My Sweet Lord, giving them the sweet soul they deserve.

And with Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr guesting, it almost feels like a Beatles reunion.

But to paraphrase a famous song;complaints, "I've had a few."

It is interesting to me that of all the artists who play George's songs, only Macca chooses to re-interpret them to any large degree.

And although it is well known that George loved the ukulele, and some find it endearing, I can't help but think Macca's uke arrangement of Something sort of trivializes what is an all-time great song. Perhaps the same could be said of the Macca treatment of All Things Must Pass. But perhaps not.

Plus, what the heck is Ringo doing Honey Don't for? Perhaps this was a favorite Beatle cover, that George liked. But what about the tune Harrison penned for Starr called Sunshine Life For Me, from the mega selling Ringo album circa 1973? Starr rarely does this tune, so it's inclusion would have been nice.

Also, in the spirit of George's cutting satirical nature, someone should have had a go at Piggies, as never before has it's message been more timely than right now.

Or how about All Too Much and Blue Jay Way? Two of George's most ethereal songs.
Even George's first Beatle compostion, Don't Bother Me, would have been welcome.

But I guess now I'm getting into the realm of nitpicking, so I'll just conclude by saying that George Harrison was a heck of musician and human being, and we are all the lesser for his passing.

I finally got 'round to reading the booklet provided with the Let it Be...Naked CD.

For a project that was supposedly in the works for almost 2 years, I think the liner notes are somewhat lame. More like more of the same Apple PR rubbish we have become accustomed to.

And the reproduction of incidental chatter by the Beatles from the original Let it Be book, takes on the element of parody, given the Rutles experience.

However, looking at some of the pix in the booklet inspires a little hope.

Hope that 2004 will finally bring the release of the original-with extras-Let it Be film, which will be 34 years old in the new year.

Unavailable for 20 years, and last reproduced in a short lived Japanese laser disc edition, a newly remastered and restored version in 5.1 sound will most likely be the Beatle event of 2004-hopefully.

Unless Apple drops the ball completely, the Let it Be film will be everything the LIBN CD was not.

Although some of LIB is tedious,with the lads bitching and moaning, it will all be worthwhile if for no other reason that we finally get a remastered rooftop performance.

The mini concert-the last time the Beatles would perform together in public-is simply fantastic, if not for its music, then for its lively energy and vibe.

The Beatles seemed to be actually enjoying being a group again, and it sure showed.

If Apple goes the same way with LIB that it has with previous rereleased Beatle films, the flix will have a limited theater showing, and then straight to DVD.

And this will be where Apple can really create a minor masterpiece.

Those of you familiar with any of the Get Back era bootlegs know that there were about 10 days worth of jamming done at Twickenham Film Studios that was all filmed and recorded, yet only a small portion appeared in the original released film.

(They should even have a R rated section of Beatle chatter, with my all-time fave of John Lennon commenting on an American group that called themsleves the Motherf***ers, and their chances of having a hit listed on the Billboard charts.)

An expanded DVD release would allow for much more of this material to be used, even if a lot of it is unfinished and sloppy. Unfortunately the Twickenham tapes are the infamous Nagra reels, that were recorded in mono only, so no 5.1 for that batch.

But when the group fled Twickenham for Apple Studios, all subsequent material was recorded on an 8 track console, so we should get some delicious sounds from those tapes.

I wonder if Apple will have the gall/courage/accommodation to release a "soundtrack" album to the film, with all "new" versions of the Let it Be songs and rooftop on a stand alone CD.

I think, as they say, it would be really cool.

So the "quiet" Beatle, George Harrison will finally take his rightful place in the Rock And Roll Hall of Fame.

Hard not to figure why it took so long, and also to not suspect that if George had not so prematurely passed two years ago, he would still be waiting to get into the HOF.

Perhaps it was because George had turned his back on the rock biz for almost 15 years, or that he was overshadowed by John Lennon and Paul McCartney, who were obvious locks.

But think about it;Harrison should not have had to be "Beatle George" to get inducted.

Harrison's prodigious solo output between 1970 and 1974, including the top selling All Things Must Pass,Concert For Bangladesh, Living in the material World, and the Dark Horse album and tour, should have given him an automatic pass to the HOF at least 20 years ago.

Not to mention the great success of Cloud Nine in 1987 as well as the Travelling Willbury's.

Or even George's role as producer on the big selling Badfinger records.

If any other solo musician of the note and stature of Harrison would have moved the millions and millions of units George did in the space of 4 years, that artist would have been in the HOF no questions asked.

But to add the pedigree of being an ex- Beatle and still not be in the Hall, was really dumb on the part of the HOF.

There would not even seem to be any musical politics involved;just dumbness.

I won't go into some of the others that have beat Harrison into the HOF because that would be impolite.

But suffice to say, George was probably as good or better than 90% of the inductees before him. His guitar playing alone should have got him in.

Perhaps the oversight was due to George's own attitude about such things. He never waged a public campaign to get into the HOF, as many musicians or their backers tend to do.

Hopefully, the added publicity of having Harrison in the Hall will bring about the long awaited re-release of much of his back catalogue, which evidently has been in the works now siince well before George died.

Personally, I can't wait to hear a remastered version of Living In the Material World, which was such a beautiful and spiritual record.

If LITMW can be given the same deluxe treatment afforded All Things Must Pass, then it will be so fine indeed.

How about the great what if today, on the 40th anniversary of the assassination of president John F. Kennedy .

You know, the what if that if JFK had not been gunned down and the nation-and much of the world-were not in such great mourning and depression, would the Beatles have taken the United States in such a storm as they did, just two months after the dark day in Dallas.

Afterall, the Kennedy's were cool even before the Beatles defined a new version.

John Kennedy had been good friends with another king of cool, Frank Sinatra, and that whole Rat Pack swinger brand of kool, that was so hot in the late 50s and early 60s.

It's easy to picture JFK groovin' to Come Fly With Me, but would he have dug She Loves You (yeah, yeah, yeah) and I Want To Hold Your Hand?

In my opinion, Kennedy would have greeted the Beatles with some level of bemusement originally, unlike Lyndon Johnson-almost 15 years JFK's senior-who most likely thought they were some sort of traveling beatniks theater group and completely ignored them.

But that still does not answer the central question of would the Fabs have been just as big under Kennedy, as they were under Johnson?

My answer is a qualified yes.

Qualified, because I think the Fabs and their old continent new style, in the absence of Camelot, became the new touchstone for celebrity in the United States, but that in the end, the music makes or breaks total popularity.

And because the Beatles were such talented musicians, they most likely would have become just as big, even sharing the stage with the Kennedy's.

Some may recall that Kennedy used a modified Sinatra sung tune-High Hopes-as his campaign song in 1960, and as JFK was always a man of the times, maybe he might even have incorporated some sort of variation of a Beatles song for 1964.

Could you imagine John Kennedy wearing a Beatle wig and boots? Neither can I really, but I guess anything was possible.

And as the Beatles music changed through the 60s, would JFK have been a fan of their more introspective and serious work, beginning with Help!

I wonder what Kennedy would have said after John Lennon remarked that the Fabs were bigger than Jesus Christ, or the controversy around the withdrawn "Butcher Cover."

Would the president, who would have just turned 50, dig the modern and groundbreaking sounds of Sgt. Pepper. Or would he have denounced it as being drug influenced, rather than the high pop art it has come to be known as.

Kennedy was always very politically astute so he couldn't have possibly ignored the then swelling younger political constituency of the Baby Boomers to whom the Fabs were hero's.

But would he have met with the Beatles by 1968 in a serious fashion to discuss world peace and the youth movement?

Man, what a photo-op that would have been.

Hey, you know what I think?

I think the long, long, long, awaited and anticipated remastering of the Beatles back catalogue may be on the fast track.

Why? Because of Michael Jackson's legal and money troubles.

In the Nov. 21 national edition of The New York Times, it was reported that Jackson's record company, Sony Music Entertainment, own the publishing rights to 250 Beatles songs, on 50-50 basis with Jackson.

The Times story also says that Jackson is known to have borrowed up to $240 million against the catalogue between 1998 and 2000. According to the Times story, Jackson's catalogue-which includes his own material-is valued at $700 million to $1 billion.

So what we have here like Jackson himself, is a very weird situation.

The Beatles do not own their own material, and therefore their record company, Apple/EMI , and the Fabs themselves,lose out on the bulk of bucks from putting out the group's records.

And as EMI has lately been looking to merge with another record company, they would immediately become a prime merger gem if Sony could acquire a controlling interest in the Beatles publishing rights. Then, Sony would be foolish not to chase after EMI-or vice versa-of course with a Paul McCartney led interest in the Fabs' publishing.

It makes sense; Jackson is probably in money trouble, and his best asset is the 50% stake of Fabs tunes. He will most likely have to sell all, or a major part of his Beatles interest.

Maybe it makes too much sense, but I think Macca is still smarting from what many onlookers described as a double-cross by Jackson, when then "King of Pop" Michael outbid Paul for the Beatles songs back in the late 80s, after reportedly telling Paul he would never buy them out from beneath the Beatles.

Presumably, that has been one of the most important factors in the hold up of a remastered back catalogue. Obviously Macca and Beatles et al does not relish MJ raking in yet even more mega bucks on the backs of hard Beatle work.

If the very strange Jackson is no longer a factor, then I think the money people-and that sure includes McCartney-will very quickly do business.

Under a joint Sony/Apple/EMI/whatever except for Jackson partnership, I believe the Fabs' catalogue could easily be worth $2- 3 billion bucks. And when you are talking that level of dough, you just know the re-jigged catalogue is just right around the corner.

So I say by this time next year, the Beatles and Apple will have a controlling interest in the Fabs' catalogue of songs, and the consumers and fans will have a very merry 2004, 5.1 Christmas.

Or, to borrow from a famous song: "Look out! It's comin' down fast!"

Hey man-and woman-it looks like I's in good company with my so-so rating of the new Let it Be...Naked CD.

The new Q magazine calls it mediocre, and bestows a rating of two stars out of 5, so that would translate into a 4 out of 10, the same rating that several of my readers gave it.

But like I said yesterday, I'm firmly on 6 something, and I don't think I will be revising either up or down again. Um,speaking words of wisdom, let it be, I guess.

Many people have many different beefs about LIBN, but a universal one is what the producers did to Get Back.

No one-including me-can figure out why they truncated it. I'm not even sure I ever heard a boot without the coda/reprise. So like, what gives? Did Macca want it this way? And if so, why?

I have not heard an explanation of what their reasoning was on getting rid of perhaps the best part of the song, and even if I do hear one, I won't buy it.

In fact, given recent and ancient history, I'm not sure I would believe anything Apple says.

And I won't buy using the take of Let it Be that is used on LIBN. It's not as good as Phil's one.

Most people are obviously impressed by the remastering job done on this release, but just as many question why it was not offered as a SACD hybrid disc, similar to the Rolling Stones reissues last year.

Even when not played on an SACD player-and even when not in 5.1 mode-the sound is superior-I think-to any other CD format. Just compare the new Who Tommy SACD in regular CD play mode to the LIBN disc. In my opinion, the Tommy CD sounds noticeably better than LIBN.

I am also reading that the Copy Control on LIBN has got a helluva wallop to it. So far, I have not read one account of a successful copy.

So maybe we are missing the point here.

Maybe the point of the whole LIBN affair, is to test fire a new shot over the bow in the copy music wars.

Afterall, if LIBN sells 10 million units, and nobody can copy it, won't that signal to all the other music companies that they can do the same thing too with all of their major, major artists?

Previously, companies have been a bit skitish about strict anti-copy measures, as they tended to not play in all players or PCs.

But if Apple/EMI have found the golden goose, then once again the Fabs would have been the trendy first.

And perhaps in what might be another (unfortunate) first, it seems to me that many supposed to be serious music journalists have thrown objectivity to the wind, and engaged in a shameless suck-up to this LIBN thing.

I have read far too many teacher's pet accounts of this project, and it seems to me that common sense would dictate that many more writers should have been declaring that the emperor has no clothes, and that furthermore, the clothed version was full of wisdom, so maybe the whole thing should have been let be.

Such is the Fabs fodder for today.

Well kiddies once again, it's once again time for me to take a pranging from readers for my rather unflattering assessment of the new, so called, improved Let it Be...Naked CD.

Look, I calls 'em as I see 'em-and hear 'em-and after all the hoo-ha generated by this warmed up left over, I gave my honest opinion.

And honestly-in my opinion-Apple set themselves up for a fall, trying to re-do a significant piece of music history.

But many of you obviously did not agree-with one exception, and some of you will be heard.

"Ouch," e-mailed Jon. "You're breaking my heart!"

"I'll grant you that the packaging is lame, but couldn't you find something nice to say about what they have done to the music," asked Jon.

Jon, I agree, LIBN does sound good, but it's hardly the concept of "as nature intended." If edits were staples, there's enough on this disc to make up a new Frankenstein.

"I think it's great," wrote Robert.

"With LIBN. I think we get the best of Get Back, and the best of Let it Be," figured Robert.

I think that may be one legit way of looking at this thing, but still...

And Jack e'd to say he was quite cross.

"Terry, it's the Beatles for God's sake!"

Jack went on to say that he had been "driving around with tears in (my) eyes, listening to the wonderful sounds of the Fabs."

Obviously, I didn't add any further joy to Jack's day, and he's really right about the "wonderful sounds of the Fabs." That will always be so, in greater or lesser degrees.

But just when I though I were to be lynched, up popped the following:

"Terry, you've hit it right on the head again," proclaimed Steve. (And I'm not making any of this up.)

Steve was a lot rougher on LIBN than yours truly and went on to say "because I feel a bit duped by Sir Paul's manipulating ego, I can only give it a 4 out of 10."

As Jon said, "OUCH!"

I'm sticking with my original rating-well, OK, I raised it to 6.5 today after another listen-because I still feel that it is an unrequited project of love, still to be properly consummated.

And I'm not touching "Sir Paul's manipulating ego" with a 10 foot pole, lest all the Macca Madhatters burst their bladders with vexatious prose aimed at me.

(Plus, I'm not even going to talk about the one reader who called LIBN "Paul's personal vanity project," as that would be too catty. And besides, Yoko says she corrected all the errors in the mix herself.)

So there you have it, (some of) the Beatle peeps, have spoken.

But I doubt strongly, the matter is closed.

Well kiddies, the time is nigh.

I kept my promise of not commenting on Let it Be...Naked until it's release, and today it's out, and so many of you have had the chance to absorb the most hyped Beatles release since the first Anthology set in 1995.

So I hear they took out the wind from the rooftop performances used in this CD, and added some echo, and yet all they proved was that Phil Spector knew what he was doing in 1970 when he rescued the mess that was Get Back/Let it Be.

This LIBN redux doesn't stink, but in my opinion, it ain't too good either.

I mean, if this were a bootleg, I would rank it beneath a lot of versions I've heard for close to 25 years now.

Sure the sound is the best it has ever been for this particular batch of songs, but why the hell not;they were working with multi-reels and master tapes and used state of the art audio processing equipment, not cassette dubs and the Nagra reels like the bootleggers were.

LIBN is probably better than the widely circulated Glyn Johns versions, but just barely.

Get Back without the coda? Gimme a break! It sounds like an unfinished song, which it is in this form.

I don't even care for Don't Let Me Down, which is much more a group sing now than any other version I have ever heard. And Don't Let Me Down is one of my fave Fabs tunes, so to me, this is a let down.

I've Got A Feeling comes off fairly well, as does I Me Mine and For You Blue.

The big noise about the unfettered Long And Winding Road is so much hot air, as the take used-from the film Let it Be-is an inferior one -I think-and once again proves Spector a genius.

John Lennon said it best: these were "shitty" tapes.

As for the "bonus" Fly On The Wall disc, it starts out promising-Apple/EMI have made good use of all the Nagra reels they got back in that police raid last year-with the very first words of the Fabs recorded on Jan. 2 1969 at Twickenham, but then it bogs down with a bunch of Beatle chatter that reminds one more of the Pre Fab Four Rutles, than the Beatles.

The packaging? Two words:it sucks.

Who in their right mind would put 4 of the most famous faces in the history of pop culture-and some might argue all of culture-on the cover in exposed negative form? And the booklet is all in b&w!

Maybe the rocket scientists at Apple/EMI think the kids of today would consider it "cool." To everyone else, it may just be quite unbelievably stupid.

I suppose for those who have never heard a Get Back era boot, this disc plus the FOTW will be interesting, but for most Beatle fans, it is, once again, a let down.

There was a blurb on the WWW today, about how there is already a 5.1 version of LIBN ready to go. My question would be, why?

"As nature intended," has got very little to do with Dolby Surround Sound, but rather the simplicity of two guitars, bass, drums and an organ, which is what the Fabs supposedly envisioned in the first place. Perhaps as a gimmick, it may fly, but I doubt it.

Maybe this thing will grow on me, but for now, on a scale of 1-10, I'd rate this version of Let it Be a 6, and the Fly On The Wall, a swatted 2.

Next: your comments on LIBN.

Yesterday's Bits got me thinking about George Harrison.

So I finally got 'round to skimming through "Harrison By The Editors of Rolling Stone," a gorgeous coffee table book that was released in 2002, but has recently been remaindered by the publishing company.

I had bought it for $17.99 two weeks ago, and had propped it up in a chair in my living room.

The book has a great b&w shot of George on the cover, and every time I looked at it, the book George was looking back at me-and I'm sayin' to myself, "self, get your ass in gear and pick up that book!"

So anyway, this morning I did.

And while most of the text of the book contains previously published material, there is a beautiful and touching forward my Olivia Harrison, as well as a nice note from Yoko Ono, who reveals that Oliva called her at 3 AM in the morning to break the news of George's untimely death from cancer, in Nov. 2001.

Ono also says that George used to visit John at the Dakota during the mid 70s, and George confirms that in an interview from 1987.

And incidently, 1987 was the first time that Harrison had spoken to Rolling Stone, since they panned his 1974 Dark Horse tour. According to the book, George was still a little ticked off when RS came calling for a photo shoot for Cloud Nine.

When you are in the music biz, 13 years off the pages of the most influential music mag can't be good, but that period of time away was also a reflection of George's intense dislike of the "business" of making music.

After releasing a handful of albums between 1975 and 1982 most to less than great critical acclaim and sales, George went recordless for 5 years until his "comeback" release, Cloud Nine.

And if you don't count the two Traveling Willbury's releases and the 1990 Live in Japan album, George actually went another 13 years before his posthumous release of Brainwashed, itself a treatise on the rottenness of the "system."

One of my favorite parts of the book is the 1987 interview, in which George talks about how LSD allowed him to literally step outside his ego, and see God in every blade of grass.

There's also a neat bit from 1974, wherein George basically says if you don't like what he is doing on the tour, well, you can just take a hike, because his was not "Beatle George," anymore.

As I wrote in BB55, the 1974 tour was recorded-George says so in an interview-and it is also revealed that he and his band rehearsed 18 songs worth of material for the shows.

And there is a very telling bit where it is revealed that Ravi Shankar actually talked George into doing at least one Beatle song-In MY Life-as that is what the fans would expect.

Interestingly, Harrison did not even want to perform My Sweet Lord, but he eventually did, usually changing the lyrics and then even shouting out the words to Something, another tuned Harrison considered in the past.

This excellent book originally listed for about $40, so if you can find it at half price or less, it would make an excellent investment.

Is it just me, or does anyone else notice a sort of weird timing for the latest batch of ex-Beatle DVD releases?

Pretty hard to figure out who was-or was to be first-but The Concert For George, Lennon Legend, and Paul is Live, all were skedded to arrive at just about the same time, although the George set has evidently been delayed.

And its easy to understand why the record companies would want them out at this time of year, but in reality, it pits all of the releases against one another, in addition to the new Let it Be...Naked CD.

Of course all Beatles fans hope for an embarrassment of riches when it comes to Fabs product because its all good, but is there a limit?

Could the onslaught of so many releases cause the consumer to sort of freeze, or to favor one over the other?

Historically, January is a very dead month for audio and video releases. Couldn't one of the November/December be scheduled for January or February?

I can readily understand why Apple/EMI released LIBN in the Christmas period because that has been the pattern for Beatle releases going on 40 years now.

And the Concert for George was widely anticipated release and was all new material, so I can also understand the rationale behind its original release date.

But the Lennon and McCartney offerings are questionable.

True, both contain material that has heretofore been unavailable-footage and music by Lennon that has not been seen or heard, and unreleased McCartney performances from 1989-but both are still quite familiar overall to fans.

Both of these releases would make nice treats in the grey, drab mid winter period, and would also have the added advantage of more media coverage, seeing that they would not be buried in an avalanche of other X-mas season music product.

I understand that the Lennon DVD contains some interesting new mixes-re-done to the consternation of some by Yoko Ono-and presented in 5.1 audio for the first time.

Ditto for the Macca DVD, which also debuts in 5.1 audio and has some solid stuff, notwithstanding the inclusion of Biker Like An Icon, perhaps second only to Bip Bop as most annoying McCartney composition.

And the performances feature a Sir Paul with 15 years less wear and tear on the old pipes , and it really shows on some of the high and drawn out vocal parts.

(That's one of the thing Paul just can't defeat no matter how indefatigable he is: Father Time. Macca just keeps getting older, while Lennon is frozen relatively youthful in time.)

In any event, it might be a good idea for all at Apple/EMI-and the so-called committee that oversees all Beatles related releases-to flip a coin in the future, to see who gets to go first.

Meanwhile, we can all look forward to the Concert For George, which from all accounts, is dynamite.

Every Beatles fan has a personal wish list.

You know, a list of recordings that they would really like to hear, but have not been officially released.

The first one that comes to my mind is the 1974 George Harrison North American concert tour.

Although the tour was not given much critical acclaim, a friend of mine couldn't give a damn about what the papers were saying, and he did manage to score scarce tickets to Harrison's Toronto stop.

And in another of my not too smart life decisions, I turned down the chance to go and see George, in what would have been almost 10 years to the month that I had seen the Fabs play at Maple Leaf Gardens in Toronto.

I had been reading some of the not so great reviews of the Harri's on Tour Express in the popular rock press, and I decided that I would pass.

Some fans may recall how George was pounded almost unmercifully for his mixture of rock music and eastern religion.

But my friend attended the concert, and I recall how enthused he was with Billy Preston who guested, and even with the first part of the show, which featured east Indian music.

I think he actually went out and bought a Ravi Shankar album after the concert.

In any event, George was playing tunes from All Things Must Pass, Living in the Material World, and Dark Horse, although I don't think George's part of the show was much more than an hour.

So far, the only legit release of any these performances came with the 1988 book Songs By George Harrison-another item I sadly used to own-as a bonus CD containing 2 tracks from the '74 tour, in mono for some reason.

So its probably a no-brainer that most of the shows from that tour were recorded, with the possibility of a live release in the works for 1975 or later.

However, possibly due to the problems that George was having with his voice, and the general bad press afforded the tour, we have heard nothing else since the book release 15 years ago.

So I would like to wish that at some point, the best of the 1974 tour will be released and we can judge for ourselves whether George was indeed a dark horse, or just plain hoarse.

Man, I just gotta tell ya that I really love listening to the Fabs. It is just a real gas.

And especially when a very kind reader lays a whole collection of the best sounding Beatle issues on the planet on you.

Let me explain; I get many e-mails offering me stuff, most of which I politely decline. (Like how would you like a kick in the ass or a punch in the head?) Just kidding, I think...

But this one regular reader is different. The reader e-mailed me on one of my semi-regular rants on the deficiency of the Beatles catalogue on CD. To the rescue they came!

This fabulous Fabs fan offered to provide me with ALL of the Beatles Mobile fidelity Sound Lab releases, PLUS the Japanese mono issues of the White Album and Sgt.Pepper, and just as a toppermost of the poppermost, the MFSL UHQR version of Sgt.P, which is the gold standard of audio.

(For those not experienced, the Ultra High Quality Recording from MFSL were on special heavy duty virgin vinyl and profess to be the best sounding of any record ever produced.I won;t argue with them.)

So I poured me-self a long, cool tall one and sat back and enjoyed it all.

MFSL really knew what they were doing. Their Beatles stereo recordings are very full, dimensional, and lively. Especially telling are Beatles For Sale and A Hard Day's Night, both recorded in 4 track stereo, yet only released in mono on CD. Yech! Boo, hiss! Whoever made the decision in 1987 to issue these 2 in mono was daft.

Its great to hear these master tapes as-to coin a phrase-as nature intended-mistakes and all. They are breath-taking.

It seems to me that I recall seeing an interview with George Martin about 10-15 years ago where he basically dissed the MFSL pressings. With all due respect to Sir George, he must have been having a bad day when he said that the MFSLs were not up to par.

(I think a lot of the argy bargy centered around the fact that the first two Beatles albums were only recorded in 2 tracks, and non-MFSL issues tended to have the instruments on one channel, and the vocals on the other .But the MFSL engineers were not dummies, and they tweaked the masters to the point where 'stereo" was presentable.)

Even Help!-in my opinion-sounds better from the MFSL version than the released CD.

And the UHQR Pepper, well, I'd love to turn you on.

The only sobering issue of note is the sound of the mono transfers from vinyl to CD.

Its not that they don't sound clean, but rather they come off sounding rather a tad lifeless compared with their stereo counterparts, and when/if Apple/EMI ever get their act together and issue these recordings on CD, I hope they can punch up the sound on these historic monophonic recordings.

Who would have thought at the dawning of the digital age that the best sounding Beatles recordings would come from vinyl recordings dating back almost 25 years?

For the umpteenth time, shame on you Apple/EMI!

And thank God for Beatle fans!

Its a well known fact in journalism circles that being a columnist is a plum position.

Unlike the frontline grunts that have to pretty much stick to just the facts ma'am, a columnist is required by format to put his or her's 2 cents into every piece they write.

Some times, I'm not sure that readers understand this fact of journalistic life, especially on the Internet. For God's sake, anyone/everyone can have an opinion on the triple W.

(And I never make any claims of being a Beatle "expert.")

I regularly get raked over the coals in e-mail and on various Internet forums for daring to offend this or that's fans' sensibilities or likes or dislikes, or GOD FORBID I make an error "in fact."

Yet dig, kids, this rendering of opinion is what I'm SUPPOSED to do. If I don't take a position on an issue, it's hardly a column then, is it? So like the Prez said, "bring it on!"

But like I have told you before, this aspect of the job is an occupational hazard, and is to be expected, even relished in some instances if it is exceptionally daft.

For example, I know that all I have to do is write something even mildly mawking or less than loving about Paul McCartney, and I will receive the most e-mails, some of them questioning my ancestry as well as sanity.

I was unaware prior to engaging in this wonderful opportunity afforded me by AbbeyRd, that Macca fans have taken a blood oath to their man, and will defend him on land, sea and air. Plus the Internet.

I once read on a wall that "Clapton is God," but never McCartney.

So I know that the mere mention of the above will get me some new hate mail.

But guess what kiddies?

If I write positive things about dear Sir Mac, I don't get so much as a there you go, how to do, from his apparent legion of admirers. It's almost like their deafening silence is saying, "you have not kissed his arse enough," and besides, "we'll never forgive you for what you said." Or even didn't say.

I'll bet I could be Macca Braunnoser of the Month, and I still wouldn't get any TLC from the committed.

So I guess I'll just have to go on through the years writin' 'em as I see 'em, and let the slings and arrows of outrageous McCartney- love fortune pierce and bash me where they may.

But will you still needle me, will you still bleed me, when I'm 64?

Saw another poll on the WWW the other day, listing the top Beatles songs in order, with this one claiming to be the "ultimate" one.

These types of polls usually satisfy no one; to the contrary, they usually get some of the more sensitive fans upset. But there ain't no denying they stimulate the debate.

So, two years ago, I did a top Fabs' 50 for Oldies 1150 CKOC in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

I had a heck of a time choosing my 50 songs because so many were, and still are, huge.

Before each tune-counted down in reverse order-I gave a short little synopsis and brief history for the track, and the program was well received.

And for all you touchy Paul McCartney enthusiasts who love beating up on me, guess what song I picked for the my all time Beatles number 1? You betcha! Hey Jude.

I picked Jude for two main reasons.

Number 1, it sold the most copies of any single Fabs record, and Number 2.I think the song defined the 60s. Not to mention it had a killer melody and an easy to sing chorus.

It was one of those tunes that gets immediately stuck in your head, from the first time you hear it.

And for a while in 1968, I know it rattled around my noggin 24 hours a day, for weeks.

Memory may fail me, but I believe my number 2 on the radio show was Help!, followed by Something.

I also had I Want To Hold Your Hand and She Loves You in the top 10, the first two Beatle songs I ever heard.

But really, it becomes an exercise in futility because everyone has their own favorites and personal top 10 or top 50, from an archive of around 150 songs. And because of the overall excellence of most everything the Fabs recorded, who could argue with any given list, unless the number 1 is Mr. Moonlight or Revolution Number 9.

(RN 9 is OK at 2...just kidding!)

And I reserve the right to make changes to my fave list, as the whim or mood strikes me.

It would be interesting though, to have a truly scientific poll from fans worldwide, but I'd be willing to lay odds that Hey Jude would be numero uno.

But I have a confession to make: I don't think Mr. Moonlight is all that bad...

Well, we're nifty at 50, but can Sgt. Pepper be better?

Of all the Beatles albums that fans want to hear remastered, perhaps Sgt. P is at the top of the list.

Yet, we are currently stuck with a 15 year old digital drek artifact that is flat and lifeless.

Unbelievably-and it should shame Apple/EMI greatly-the best versions of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band are actually knock-offs, transferred to CD from pristine Japanese vinyl mono pressings, and the benchmark Mobil Fidelity Sound Lab UHQR stereo pressing.

Both of these versions make the official CD sound like a muffled gravel crusher.

But unfortunately, because Apple/EMI is so far behind the times, we may never get official releases of original mono and stereo issues, because, even stereo is now a relic of the audio age.

Surround Sound 5.1 and now 6.1 will be the immediate standard for high end audio, relegating everything else to the dustbin of consumer history.

So unfortunately, the majority of keen Beatle fans will never get to hear a clean mono version of Sgt. Pepper with all its lovely differences to the stereo version, unless something out of the blue happens.

And in fact, what we might get is a version of Sgt. P-say within a year or two-that is a version that nobody has ever heard before. And may not even feel comfortable with or like.

As Abbey Road Studios retains the original multi-track reels of just about everything the Fabs every recorded in the studio, the engineers and producers can assemble a completely new version of Pepper, for better, or worse.

I reported in a story in the National Post in January 1999-which is still archived on AbbeyRd-that Apple/EMI had aborted plans to release a mono/and or improved stereo version of Pepper in the fall of 1997, for any number of reasons still unclear.

It would seem to me that it would be too late to move specifically on a mono/stereo Pepper similar to what Capitol/EMI did with the Beach Boys Pet Sounds remaster.

That would make albeit tardy, sense for sure, but is surely out of the question given the track record of Beatles CD releases.

So that would leave only the possibility that a DVD-A release-and what we are hearing lately is that Apple/EMI is now leaning towards SACD-with its ability to story about 4 hours of music, would include a straight mono mix as a bonus.

But that would be a long shot at best.

So if you have a chance at a clean mono version of Sgt. Pepper, I'd grab it now if I were you.

So we pick up the story from yesterday...

3 tickets to the 1964 matinee Beatles show at Maple Leaf Gardens in Toronto were mine, but who was going with me, and how would we get there?

If I recall correctly, the face value of my tickets were $4.50 a piece. And while that sounds like a ridiculously low sum of money now, back then if a kid had $5 in his or her pocket, they were "rich."

So anyway, I started letting all my male friends know that I had the tickets.

But then something funny started happening. For this reason or that, none of my friends who were boys-and all of them were huge Beatles fans-could go.

So what happened was, my mother started calling around to the neighbors, and I ended up going with two girls. One an older sister of one of my best friends, and the other a girl I barely knew.

The day of the concert, Sept. 7, was a Monday and a holiday in Canada. The weather was very hot and sticky. We got a ride to Toronto with the father of one of my Beatle-mates, and I recall the mob scene outside Maple Leaf Gardens. Kids were everywhere.

We got into the building OK and found our seats, which were about 3/4 of the way back, and 3/4 of the way up.

There were a number of opening acts that nobody really paid any attention to and after an hour or so, the fans started chanting "we want the Beatles, we want the Beatles."

Then, finally, after what seemed like an eternity of an introductory speech by an onstage Toronto DJ, the boys waltzed onto the stage to the loudest noise I have ever heard in my life. Really, words do not do it justice.

Flashbulbs were going off, hundreds, if not thousands at a time. The screaming and shrieking was so incredibly loud, that I was able to only hear faint snatches of songs, not surprising when you consider the Beatles were employing only 4 100 watt Vox amplifiers, and the Gardens' antiquated PA system.

What I seem to remember most is A Hard Day's Night, which I heard only in fragments as "its....day...workin'...come...feel," such was the amazing din in the arena.

The Hollywood Bowl Lp is a great one, but it can't possibly transmit what it was like to be at a concert, other than if you listen to the record, you can actually hear the songs.

Girls were fainting and freaking out all around us, but the two I was with were rather well behaved and composed, considering.

The show was over within 25 minutes and the Fabs were gone, and the houselights quickly turned on. Everyone looked happy, but overheated and shellshocked.

It was quite hot in MLG that day, and the owner of the Maple Leafs had decided it was a good idea to turn down the water pressure for the drinking fountains, hoping to sell more soft drinks-at 10cents!- instead.

There was a mob scene as everyone left their seats at once, and when you were in a throng that was going down a ramp, you were stuck in it. To make matters worse, some idiots would occasionally yell out, "There they are!"(they weren't) and a bunch of kids would try to break free to rush after their heros.

Well, we did get out in one piece, and I recall that my ears rang for two days after the concert. I also had one hell of a great story to tell the next day, the first day back to school after summer holidays.

I can't even remember the names of the girl's that I went with, and I threw out (!) my ticket stub in 1972.

But I was there, and I'll never forget that.

How about another trip down memory lane to the time I had the good fortune of getting to see the Beatles in concert?

It was the early summer of 1964, and the truly amazing phenom known as early Beatlemania was in full bloom.

Everybody was talking about the Beatles, and just about every AM radio station in what's called the Golden Horseshoe area of Southern Ontario, Canada, was playin' the hell out of every Fabs record they could get their hands on.

And then, the Beatles first North American Tour was announced, with 2 shows at Maple Leaf Gardens in Toronto set for Sept. 7 just 40 miles up the turnpike from my hometown.

Although fans started camping out in Toronto for tickets immediately after the concert date was made known, I figured I had an ace in the hole.

My grandmother knew the two older ladies who ran the Maple Leaf Ticket Agency in Hamilton. It was called the MLTA, because they offered tickets primarily to events at Maple Leaf Gardens in Toronto, a 14,000 seat venue that was home to the Toronto Maple Leafs hockey team.

But alas, the tiny allotment that the agency received was quickly snatched up, and I figured it was game over for me and a date with the Beatles.

All through the summer, the build-up around the Toronto concerts was immense. And every time I heard or read about it, I was ticked off.

Finally by the end of August, I had pretty well forgotten about not getting tickets to the big
Beatles show, and how all my bragging about "connections" had went for naught.

Then, the miracle.

I was fishing with a friend of mine named Benny down around the western shore of Lake Ontario a week or so before the concert.

Benny had borrowed his father's new fishing rod, and proceeded to accidently throw it into the water with an errant cast. Of course he was beside himself, but I cast with my rod and on the second attempt, luckily snagged Benny's dad's rod, and retrieved it, much to the relief of poor Ben who would be expecting a world of hurt if he went home without the rod and reel.

Then literally within minutes, my mother drove up close to where we were and said,"Terry, your grandmother got tickets to the Beatles concert for you!"

Yes,prayers had been answered and someone had cancelled their order at the ticket agency, and my grandmother's friends remembered us and gave us first dibs on 3 tickets to the afternoon show.

The seats were quite high up and quite far back, but that didn't matter in the least. They could have been on the Gardens' roof for all I cared. We were going to see the Fabs!

So even though we didn't catch any fish that day, I did fish out one fishing pole, and landed tickets to the Beatles second concert ever in Canada.

Well its already that time of year again; time for the annual Goldmine Beatles issue.

I just picked up my copy today, the one with a nice glossy color shot of Ringo Starr on the cover.

Ten to 15 years ago, the Goldmine Beatles issue was among the most anticipated and purchased Beatles related publication in the world.

The information contained in the Beatles issue was usually unavailable just about anywhere else, save for a few specialty record collecting books.

And unlike most other publications, readers bought the Goldmine Beatles issue for the ads, not in spite of.

Back in those days, you could find ads for Beatle CDs that they did not sell in stores.

I recall with real fondness the one dealer who always put a huge ad in the Beatles issue, offering mono copies of the White Album and Sgt. Pepper on CD.

Back in those days, Goldmine had all sorts of great advertisers -- even in Japan -- that offered stuff that was near impossible to find anywhere else.

The stories in the Goldmine Beatles issue would sometimes delve into rarities and mono/stereo differences, and I remember diggin' out a 1995 issue to write my Sgt. Pepper mono piece for the National Post in 1999 -- still archived on the Abbeyrd site -- and using what I found in the mag for my story.

And through the recent years, I have occasional written for Goldmine, and I have a tremendous respect for the magazine.

But the Internet has, I think, diminished somewhat the importance of the annual Beatle issue.

Its not that the issue isn't excellent -- the current one has a fantastic round-up of Beatles chart action from 1964 to present -- but rather because of the leadtime of a bi-weekly mag, and the instant immediacies and unlimited archiving of the Internet, the Beatles issue could not possibly be the force it once was.

Credit should be given however, to editor Greg Loescher, who is very much aware of the situation, and has countered by ordering more contextual pieces to offset the "here first" advantage of the Net.

And one of the things that the Internet will never have, is the tactile advantage of the reader being able to curl up with a magazine and drink in hand, and not be bothered by glare from a computer screen, or a slow download.

Even though many of the old advertisers no longer hawk their Beatle wares in Goldmine, some very upscale ones have replaced the old ones, and some of them look quite promising indeed.

There is also a certain cache when it comes to a publication like Goldmine. I can't think of any other North American publication other than Rolling Stone that has as much or more authority when it comes to the Beatles.

So I say bravo to Goldmine, and I look forward not only to 2005's Beatle issue, but also to next February's special issue on the anniversary of the Beatles first US visit.

Psst. Shss. Quiet. I've got a secret, and I don't want anyone to know.

So don't tell anyone, but I like Paul McCartney.

He was my "favourite" Beatle when I was 9 years old.

"I'm Down" was one of my all time fave Beatle songs.

I like how he admitted to taking drugs in 1967.

When I am forced to choose my favourite all-time Fabs song, it is Hey Jude.

I like the cheeky sheit Paul pulled back in 1970 when he included a Q&A to himself in his first solo album, McCartney, and announced he was quitting the Fabs.

I also liked Maybe I'm Amazed; definitely the "best" solo Beatle record of 1970.

I liked the idea of Wings, in which Macca got a band together and toured out of the way places in England to get his mojo workin'.

I also liked Paul having the guts to have a go at the Northern Ireland mess, with his quickly banned Give Ireland Back to the Irish, and later the sexy Hi Hi Hi, also banned.

I liked the fact that he took his first wife, Linda out on tour with him, knowing all the while what a beating he would take in the rock press.

I also really liked Red Rose Speedway, an album that dis-pleased many critics. It had some really good tunes on it, and the gatefold album with its multiple photos was perhaps the "best" solo Fabs offering when it comes to album art.

I liked, a lot, Macca's Live and Let Die single, as it that tore up the charts in 1973 after My Love had peeked earlier. I still like both a lot today.

I think Band on the Run is a close second with another ex-Beatle's record for "best" all time solo Beatles records.

I think that Paul's Wings Over America Tour in 1976 was the absolute best of any solo Beatle's live performing efforts.

I also think that the three-record Wings Over America package released in 1977, was a close second to any other ex-Fabs solo release that contained 3 or more Lps.

I think that the soundtrack to Give My Regards to Broad Street (the one that had No More Lonely Nights) was an enjoyable album to listen to, with some remakes of the Beatle songs just as good or even maybe -- maybe -- a bit better than the orginals.

I think I have gone far enough.

I think I will say goodnite, tonight.

Last week, in a weaker moment, I vented about some of the rather bizarre and pathological e-mails I get from some readers who don't exactly dig what it is I am doing at any particular time

(Thankfully, they are in the minority, although I can pretty well guess when they will manifest themselves- like demons-as in any column with name McCartney in it that does not contain multi platitudes for the Macca man.)

So this week, Steve Marrinuci-who receives a copy of all my reader e-mail and my responses-suggested that I write about some of the more positive and upbeat correspondence that I get.

And since he is the AbbeyRd Webmaster, I thought it was a good idea.

Just kidding! Its a good idea no matter who puts forth the prop.

I must say that some of the e-mails I receive are stunning in their completeness, information and clarity.

Some of these readers obviously put a lot of thought into their e's, and I find them great to read because I learn so much from so many of them.

I won't use any names because the one's I don't mention will feel left out, but suffice to say, there are some regular writers who share their memories and opinions with me, and I truly enjoy their insights.

This week, one reader said that they had been reluctant to even read my column because they did not know who I was, and further, they were tired of people calling themselves Beatle "experts."

I thanked the reader for their e-mail but also told them that I am not an"expert" on anything, let alone the Beatles, but rather just a journalist and a fan that has been lucky enough to have a forum to write about the Fabs.

Having people you don't know share many of their experience and hopes and dreams is a special thing, and I always take care to respect that privilege.

Many of the e-mailers exhibit an incredible depth of understanding as to why they are in love with the Beatles, and what the group has meant to their lives.

Others don't get too deep, but still display a joy over the group that is infectious.

So I hope that the readers will continue to take the time to share their thoughts and memories of the Beatles with me, as well as the hope that I will continue to stir debate on the Fabs and their times, without-as Ron Nasty once said-"owning a squadron of tanks."

Do I have to spell it out?

In BB43, I reminisced about my first Beatle records.

And that stroll down memory lane got me thinking about how many of us first generation Beatle fans either had the incredible foresight to hold on to every single Fabs item they came by, or were like me, and have absolutely nothing left from the halcyon days.

I heard from several readers about how they kept everything, and from a few like me, that never guessed this stuff would be like gold and heaved it out years ago.

But there are also some people who came by their Beatle booty by chance and/or stealthy consumership.

Garage sales started to become popular back in the late 80s, as a tidal wave of recession steamrolled North America.

In my neck of the woods in the Great White North, many first Gen Beatle fans were helping their parents move out of their family homes, or were just holding garage sales themselves to try to make some extra cash.

Astute Beatle collectors descended on these sales like locusts, and were sometimes able to buy up incredible items at highway robbery prices.

Many of the Baby Boomer sellers would just offer up boxes of LPs, not bothering to sort the good, the bad and the ugly. So in amongst the Monkees and Buckinghams and the Brady Bunch, were sometimes rare Fabs albums,and in pretty good shape.

Sometimes, there were mono copies of Sgt. Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour, and picture sleeves like Ticket To Ride, usually up to VG condition.

But the real treasures were sometimes found with the elders junk pile sale.

A common practice back in the days of 60s suburban living was for parents to buy up gifts for future neighborhood kid birthday parties, when the merchandise could be had on sale. Then the stuff would be hidden away, and sometimes forgotten in an attic or closet for 20 years, until, being discovered and considered as surplus and hawked in the driveway.

I have seen Beatle model kits still sealed, as well as a sealed copy of Rubber Soul put out for peanuts at a garage sale, because the sellers had no idea what they were worth.

Of course, just about everyone now knows that anything with the word Beatles on it is worth something.

However, just because you can't get it for a steal anymore does not mean there won't be some great opportunities for collectors in the next 5 years, as the latter pack Baby Boomer parents pass on or move away and their houses are cleaned out.

Happy hunting, and let me know what you catch.

This coming January will be 40 years since I got my first Beatles record, at the age of 8.

My parents happened to be on vacation in Florida, when I Want To Hold Your Hand rocketed to number 1. I can still remember them calling home to see how my sister and I were doing, and the first thing I said to my mother was "bring me some Beatle records." Then the second thing I said was,"bring me some Beatle records." Then the third thing...well, you get the idea.

Bringing gifts when returning from vacation was already a tradition in our family, but this particular time is the one that I will never forget.

My parents arrived around midnight-which is very late for an 8 year old-and although I heard them come in, I make-believed I was asleep, because I had other plans.

I had overheard my mom and dad talking as they laid out gifts for my sister and I, and I was pretty sure there were going to be Beatle records for me, and a Barbie doll for my sis.

In any event, I waited in my room for what seemed an eternity until I thought my parents were asleep I then snuck out of bed and down to the living room. And YES, YES! there were the records!

Meet The Beatles and Introducing the Beatles were grouped up against the sofa, as if it were a Christmas tree.

I tore off the shrink wrap and got right to playing the albums on our RCA console stereo in the living room. Somehow, I managed to play both records all the way through without waking up my mom and dad, although I strongly suspect they might have heard me and for once overlooked my bed absence, chalking it up-rightly-to my incredible excitement.

Unfortunately, like so many of us that received original Beatle albums, they are long gone.
Back then nobody I knew even took very good care of their Fabs platters, and pennies on the tone arm were the order of the day for records that were full of scratches, scuffs and peanut butter.

And that Vee Jay Introducing the Beatles could have been one of the real rare ones, that would still be worth $1000 or more, even in less than pristine condition. But I'll never know, because I think the record got thrown out around 1968.

Those first two records made me real popular with my neighborhood peers, and also resulted in me getting my own record player, as my dad not only disliked the Beatles, but was also not to crazy about me getting my fingers on his expensive RCA.

I even started playing air guitar, before there was even a name for it. A real guitar followed within a year.

And that's the story of the first Beatle records in my life.

Much hoo-ha lately on AbbeyrRd and elsewhere for the commercial release of the Beatles Ed Sullivan shows, from 1964-5.

There was even a big party and meet and greet in New York City last week for the DVD release, so obviously it has struck a commercial and critical nerve.

When I first heard about this item early last winter, I thought it was a great thing, what with the fans finally getting the first legit release of the Fabs first North American performances PLUS the original shows in their entirety WITH original commercials.

(We won't get into how the original mail-order only offering at a much higher price was for a claimed limited time only.)

Although some collectors have had video copies-usually pretty mediocre 3rd and 4th generation VHS copies- the new DVDs were transferred straight from the master, with very good audio and video, at least for stuff that is 40 years old.

I was lucky enough to be around the first time the shows aired, and February 9, 1964 will always be for me, a day etched in my memory.

In 1964 and most of 1965, Ed Sullivan was still broadcasting in black and white, and that worked out OK for me as my dad called the Beatles "sissies with long hair," and Communists," and banished me upstairs to a tiny 12" portable TV to watch the first show, while the parents watched Walt Disney or some such thing.

It is still amazing to me that my father could morph pop music, long hair and Communism, but such were the times. (I think he hated the Beatles, and if it were not for my mom, I doubt I would have been able to buy any of the Fabs' records.)

So that got me thinking about a message I saw posted on a Beatles Internet group from a fan who was really enthused about the Sullivan DVDs.

"I wasn't alive the first time it happened," complained the poster, (but) "by God I'm going to experience for myself."

The poster went on to say that they would be playing their Sullivan DVD at exactly 8pm on Feb. 9, 1964.

And this is where I get off the ride, kiddies.

There is no way-even for those of us that experienced it first hand-that the rush and fervor of that night will ever be re-experienced,unless someone invents a time machine.

No matter how good the digitally refreshed memories are, they pale in comparison to the real thing.

In fact, although I really enjoy watching these old tapes, they really only end up making me feel a lot older than I'm ready to feel.

And no matter how huge and awesome any group will ever be, they will never approach the immensity and intensity of the Beatles in February 1964 because the world has changed, and, well, you just had to be there.

"Ladies and gentlemen...THE BEE- TLES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" (Insert screams.)

I just got back from a grand retirement bash for one of the true, few, icon's of Canadian radio, Mr. Nevin Grant, the 31 year tenure program director of Oldies 1150 CKOC, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.

At one time in the early 80s, CKOC was among the top few AM rockers in all of Canada, and Nevin was known throughout the industry for his innovation and daring.

And daring is where Nev came in as far as my broadcasting career goes.

After a short tenure in 1980-1, I got out of the radio biz because it was just too cutthroat for me.

I think I went about 10 years between chats with Grant, yet when I called him out of the blue for something or another in the late 80s, he remembered me and I told him maybe one day I would try the radio rackets again.

Well, that day came in 1997, when Nev brought me on board to do a Beach Boys special.And soon after the Fab Four Find of the Week was born, and broadcast on Sunday mornings for the past 5 years.

I can't say enough about what Nevin has done for my career as a print journalist and an announcer.

Whenever I was lucky enough to place a Beatles story in a major Toronto paper, Nevin let me go on the air to talk about it. For a journalist, this sort of cross-pollination is invaluable.

And when you take a look at what he has allowed me to do with TFFFOTW-which is basically anything I want-then you've just got to know that we were all lucky to have such a mentor and booster of all things Beatle.

I would show up at the station every 6 weeks or so, and we would go into production and whip off 6-8 segments just like we were sitting in a bar shooting the breeze about the music and the times that have touched so many of us Beatle fans.

Since 1998, the listening audience of CKOC have been able to hear many rare and commercially unavailable Beatle tunes, and none of this would have been possible at any other station in all of Canada. And believe me, with some of the stuff we have played-such as the entire mono Revolution Number 9-the above is no idle boast.

I am also prone to making controversial remarks and holding unorthadox opinions, some of which got broadcast through the years.

Yet, as un-mainstream as many of the songs and gab we played, that hour on Sunday mornings was among the highest rated on the station.

For that, and everything else he did for me, I will be forever grateful to Nevin.

I will always treasure his friendship and time we spent together.

And in the end, the love you take, is equal to the love you make.

Cheerio, mate.

Lordy, Lordy. We is already "eh up" to 40!

What a short, strained trip its been.

And its a good day today too, because I have found someone else excepting myself who is harping on getting the Beatle back catalogue fixed up toots suite.

A new group on the WWW is calling itself Save The Beatles Catalogue just started up, with a lengthy and quite articulate manifesto to wit: "The original masters used to create the first pressing singles, EPs and LPs in the UK have been replaced by Apple/EMI in favor of inferior mixes such as the Help CD and the recently created heavily EQ'd, NoNoised compressed digital 'music' as exemplified by the Yellow Submarine Songtrack and 1."

"This group, by way of forming an association (hopes) to publicize the problem and convince Apple to do things differently."

Whew! That's some task the groupsters have got ahead of them.

Look, I concur totally that the catalog needs to be remastered, but there are hints in the group manifesto that the "differently" they are requesting is impossible.

It is now 40 years and counting since many of the Beatles records were produced and pressed on vinyl. Those days are gone forever, no matter how fondly we recall them.

Those 40 year old master tapes produced prior to even the most rudimentary noise control measures hiss like hell.

If you don't believe me, have a close listen to the original Unsurpassed Masters series.

In any event, I'm not a big fan of many of the noise reduction systems because yes, they do suck some of the life from the recordings. But to go without them is not possible in the digital age.

I guess I also disagree somewhat without the group's manifesto remark that YS Songtrack and 1 are somehow deficient. I don't listen to them on a high end audio system but they sure sound better to me than anything that has come before.

(Some of those original Beatle CD releases circa 1987 are sonic felonies.)

And the 5.1 mixes in the recent Anthology DVDs have been given a uniform thumbs up from just about every critic that I have read. The new and ever expanding audio technology is here to stay, folks. So get used to it.

Having said that, sure I would love to have the complete set of Millennium Remasters that evidently utilize the original mono and stereo mixes from the original UK records, but that would still not make it the "best" that could be attained.

I am not the biggest fan of Apple, but I know they have one of the best studios in the world, and the engineers and producers that work in it are far from deaf dummies.

Perhaps we should reserve judgment until a good rendering of the forthcoming Let it Be...Naked is absorbed by the greater Beatle fandom.

If LIBN sounds good-and remember that is always such a subjective exercise-then maybe we can cut Apple/EMI some slack on the sound issue, and just keep bashing away on when the heck are the 5.1 mixes coming?

So sorry new groupsters, I can't see a back to mono thing working.

But good luck, anyways.

"MAIL!!!!!"

That's the word -- or is it eh up -- that John Lennon shouts out that begins "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" -- or is it that ends "Bungalow Bill" -- and also what I usually get when I make a mistake in a BB column.

Multi mea culpas all 'round for the horrible and despicable error of forgetting about Paul McCartney's son, James, when I remarked that he would need a boy to continue the noble McCartney lineage.

Now, I could have weaseled my way somewhat out by claiming that I was referring to a male child born to Paul and Heather, but instead I just owned up.

I learned my lesson via Watergate -- the cover-up is always worse than the crime.

And according to at least one e-mail complainer, I have once again committed the crime of not worshiping Paul McCartney, like so many of these weird types apparently do.

I received an e-mail that had to be close to a 1000 words, that gave new meaning to the terms polemic and tome.

Don't like to take this nasty arrow out of the quiver, but please you ego-challenged Beatle fans out there that just ooze venom and vile all in the name of their fave Fab, GET A LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you could have seen the things I was accused of by this one reader -- all the while exposing their own prejudices and bias -- you would think I was the most hated man since Lee Harvey Oswald.

Imagine! Having the utter gall and temerity to poke fun at a multi-billion buck pop star! Shame!

And to make fun and sacrilege of the holy song, "Hey Jude"? Shame X2.

(For the record, I always rate "Hey Jude" as the number 1 Beatles song of all time.)

Oh my God, send for the National Guard! Ott must be stopped!

And what's even more screwed up, is that these obsessed "fans" -- who appear to try to channel their own self-worth through their favorite Beatle and therefore believe they are duty bound to defend any particular Fab from any perceived wrong -- are so self-righteous about everything to the point of not even noticing humour. In fact, these people appear to be humorless, such is the tone of their missives.

Recall when the Fabs first came to America? I don't think they ever answered a question on the level, ever! They were always sending up the press boobies.

Have the nut cases out there pining away for any particular Fab forgotten this?

These people give me the creeps. THE BEATLES ARE NOT GODS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THEY ARE MUSICIANS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Repeat 10 times and get some mental health evaluations. Or better still, watch the Rutles. Then you might just get it.

Still, I have had tea, and I apologize to God and Rod,
who is still not as big as the Beatles.