Wednesday, December 31, 2003
Beatle Bits #94
Two words: Lennon Legend.
I managed to grab a copy of this incredible book during the Boxing Day sales, and all I can say is I can't say enough about this book.
Bang on reproductions of some of the most important Beatle and John Lennon artifacts and memorabilia make this edition compiled by James Henke and published by Chronicle Books a must-have for any serious Beatle or Lennon fan.
Housed in an outer shell similar to a box set CD or DVD collection, this 65 page book comes with an 80 minute CD containing a Lennon interview, as well as a live performance of Imagine.
Lennon Legend: An Illustrated Life of John Lennon retails for $40.
Inside you will find superb reproductions of John's handwritten lyrics to In My Life, Day Tripper, Lucy In the Sky with Diamonds, Instant Karma, Imagine, and Beautiful Boy.
Oh, and a mini A Hard Day's Night movie poster, and a reproduction of a ticket to the Beatles Ed Sullivan appearance in August 1965, 4 Beatle color bubble gum cards, a re-print of the cover story of the very first Rolling Stone magazine which featured John on the set of How I Won The War, and many John and Yoko bed-in and peace pieces.
Really, almost too much to list here. But suffice to say, this book is going to be a major collectible, yesterday.
I think my favorite may be the reproduction of the original War is Over (if you want it) post card from Christmas 1969, but honestly, picking a fave is almost impossible.
The book ends with a personal message from Yoko Ono.
"He was my husband. He was my friend. He was my partner. He was an old soldier who fought with me. I am very pleased that John is celebrated as one of the heroes of the twentieth century in this tribute.
Love,
Yoko Ono Lennon."
Grab this one when, or if you can.
I managed to grab a copy of this incredible book during the Boxing Day sales, and all I can say is I can't say enough about this book.
Bang on reproductions of some of the most important Beatle and John Lennon artifacts and memorabilia make this edition compiled by James Henke and published by Chronicle Books a must-have for any serious Beatle or Lennon fan.
Housed in an outer shell similar to a box set CD or DVD collection, this 65 page book comes with an 80 minute CD containing a Lennon interview, as well as a live performance of Imagine.
Lennon Legend: An Illustrated Life of John Lennon retails for $40.
Inside you will find superb reproductions of John's handwritten lyrics to In My Life, Day Tripper, Lucy In the Sky with Diamonds, Instant Karma, Imagine, and Beautiful Boy.
Oh, and a mini A Hard Day's Night movie poster, and a reproduction of a ticket to the Beatles Ed Sullivan appearance in August 1965, 4 Beatle color bubble gum cards, a re-print of the cover story of the very first Rolling Stone magazine which featured John on the set of How I Won The War, and many John and Yoko bed-in and peace pieces.
Really, almost too much to list here. But suffice to say, this book is going to be a major collectible, yesterday.
I think my favorite may be the reproduction of the original War is Over (if you want it) post card from Christmas 1969, but honestly, picking a fave is almost impossible.
The book ends with a personal message from Yoko Ono.
"He was my husband. He was my friend. He was my partner. He was an old soldier who fought with me. I am very pleased that John is celebrated as one of the heroes of the twentieth century in this tribute.
Love,
Yoko Ono Lennon."
Grab this one when, or if you can.
Tuesday, December 30, 2003
Beatle Bits #93
When it comes to Beatle fans, usually any embarrassment of riches would be welcome.
Of course, the "riches" would be Fabs stuff to have and hold.
But is there ever a point when it could be too much, even for a seasoned Beatles buyer?
The reason I am asking this somewhat rhetorical question is due to a story I read today in the New York Times.
The Times story explores the coming new DVD format, a format that will provide for much sharper images-as good as HDTV images- as well as at least double the data storage capacity of the present DVD format.
Although there are two competing groups hoping to combine for a unified standard for the next generation of discs, there is already one manufacturer in Japan marketing the new player.
So will this be another wild card for the Beatles long awaited back catalogue remastering in that the current DVD format may already be on the road to being obsolete by the time Apple gets 'round to the heavy lifting?
Will the new format cause Apple to stall even longer and go with product for the next generation of disc players, thought to be available widely late next year, or quickly put out product using the old format, and then do it again several years later using the new format.
Can the golden goose be over cooked?
The word is the music industry-and yes that includes Apple/EMI no matter what we think of them-will be concentrating more on the DVD format to help make up for lost sales due to file sharing and piracy.
Published reports say that the Rolling Stones have moved about 500,000 units of their Four Flicks concert DVD, a fact that makes not only Mick and the boys happy, but also their record company. Word is this will be a big growth area for the music industry during the next few years.
And if the Stones can sell 500,000 units in under a year, just think of how many millions of Beatle units would get moved, be it the Let it Be film, the Help! film, or any other thing Fabs committed to DVD.
Also, using the new format to market the back catalogue of original Beatle albums would negate the question of SACD or DVD-A.
The mind boggles.
But I think it is safe to say that between the Beatles, and the four individual Fabs. we will be in for an avalanche of new and improved product.
And given all the new fangled-read profit making-technologies available to peddle product, we may be closer to the prize than we know.
Of course, the "riches" would be Fabs stuff to have and hold.
But is there ever a point when it could be too much, even for a seasoned Beatles buyer?
The reason I am asking this somewhat rhetorical question is due to a story I read today in the New York Times.
The Times story explores the coming new DVD format, a format that will provide for much sharper images-as good as HDTV images- as well as at least double the data storage capacity of the present DVD format.
Although there are two competing groups hoping to combine for a unified standard for the next generation of discs, there is already one manufacturer in Japan marketing the new player.
So will this be another wild card for the Beatles long awaited back catalogue remastering in that the current DVD format may already be on the road to being obsolete by the time Apple gets 'round to the heavy lifting?
Will the new format cause Apple to stall even longer and go with product for the next generation of disc players, thought to be available widely late next year, or quickly put out product using the old format, and then do it again several years later using the new format.
Can the golden goose be over cooked?
The word is the music industry-and yes that includes Apple/EMI no matter what we think of them-will be concentrating more on the DVD format to help make up for lost sales due to file sharing and piracy.
Published reports say that the Rolling Stones have moved about 500,000 units of their Four Flicks concert DVD, a fact that makes not only Mick and the boys happy, but also their record company. Word is this will be a big growth area for the music industry during the next few years.
And if the Stones can sell 500,000 units in under a year, just think of how many millions of Beatle units would get moved, be it the Let it Be film, the Help! film, or any other thing Fabs committed to DVD.
Also, using the new format to market the back catalogue of original Beatle albums would negate the question of SACD or DVD-A.
The mind boggles.
But I think it is safe to say that between the Beatles, and the four individual Fabs. we will be in for an avalanche of new and improved product.
And given all the new fangled-read profit making-technologies available to peddle product, we may be closer to the prize than we know.
Monday, December 29, 2003
Beatle Bits #92
It does not seem possible to me, but it was 36 years ago this week that the Magical Mystery Tour film was first premiered on the BBC.
Another thing that does not seem possible but in fact was true, was that the MMT special was given a big thumbs down by the British press, who some thought were lying in wait to finally "get" the Beatles after 5 years of lovey-dovey coverage.
Of course it did not help matters that a very psychedelic art film was shown in black and white because the BBC did not even broadcast in color yet.
And tinny TV speakers sure did nothing for the superb soundtrack of the film. That, and the fact the Beatles released the soundtrack music on an obsolete EP format.
So it was not until the early 70s when the film started making the rounds of college campuses, that the MMT was finally given its just due.
Hey, this was a project with one of the most outstanding of all time Fabs' tunes-I Am The Walrus-as well as Strawberry Fields Forever, at least on the rest-of-the-world MMT album.
(But don't forget;The Walrus was Paul.)
As so many years have gone by, I'd say it's now time to bang the drum for a remastered MMT, in 5.1, and with extra material.
Yes, there is currently a MMT DVD available, but as far as I know, it still has the old stereo mixes done for the VHS Hi-Fi versions that have been around since the late 80s. And besides, the all important video has not been restored which must take place to bring out the vitality of the film, orginally shot on rich, 16 mm stock.
Who knows what extra footage might still be in the vaults at Apple, but I'm sure there would be enough to pad out a new, restored MMT DVD in Surround Sound.
Line up!
Another thing that does not seem possible but in fact was true, was that the MMT special was given a big thumbs down by the British press, who some thought were lying in wait to finally "get" the Beatles after 5 years of lovey-dovey coverage.
Of course it did not help matters that a very psychedelic art film was shown in black and white because the BBC did not even broadcast in color yet.
And tinny TV speakers sure did nothing for the superb soundtrack of the film. That, and the fact the Beatles released the soundtrack music on an obsolete EP format.
So it was not until the early 70s when the film started making the rounds of college campuses, that the MMT was finally given its just due.
Hey, this was a project with one of the most outstanding of all time Fabs' tunes-I Am The Walrus-as well as Strawberry Fields Forever, at least on the rest-of-the-world MMT album.
(But don't forget;The Walrus was Paul.)
As so many years have gone by, I'd say it's now time to bang the drum for a remastered MMT, in 5.1, and with extra material.
Yes, there is currently a MMT DVD available, but as far as I know, it still has the old stereo mixes done for the VHS Hi-Fi versions that have been around since the late 80s. And besides, the all important video has not been restored which must take place to bring out the vitality of the film, orginally shot on rich, 16 mm stock.
Who knows what extra footage might still be in the vaults at Apple, but I'm sure there would be enough to pad out a new, restored MMT DVD in Surround Sound.
Line up!
Sunday, December 28, 2003
Beatle Bits #91
In your last BB, I told you about a magazine story concerning the sad sonic state of the Beatles back catalogue on CD.
Now, I'd like to discuss what at least one entity is doing about the above.
Dr. Ebbett's-whomever or whatever-is currently marketing a Beatles back catalogue that should give new meaning to the term "free enterprise."
"Free," as in the DR.E entity markets it's releases free from royalties even though some of it's releases bare the corporate logo of Capitol Records, and "enterprise," as in this DR.E outfit is peddling so many titles it will make even a confirmed Beatlemaniac's head spin.
Currently-and I guess if you know where to look-you can get every single original Beatles LP release on CD, and all with faithfully reproduced art work and liner notes.
So that means you can get the United Artists issue of A Hard Day's Night in mono or stereo-although UA never did have a true stereo master with which to produce a stereo record-as well as the Capitol version of Help!, with it's insipid movie score filler.
Even though most of the Beatles "stereo" Capitol releases right up to Magical Mystery Tour were either not stereo or mock stereo that sounded crappy, all are available from Dr. Ebbett's.
Good God, you can even get a mono and a stereo version of The Beatles Story!
(File under get a life, even for completists!)
But the good doctor does have some rather interesting curios on the menu, and the one that caught my eye was an apparent finished package of The Beatles Live at the Hollywood Bowl, a single album with distinct art work, including a complete 1964 concert, and dating to 1964 and 1966 described as a "Capitol project."
The Beatle Rarities album is also available, which contains mixes of several songs that are unavailable anywhere else, including Penny Lane with the extra horn notes.
Many fans may find such offerings quite unresistable, regardless of their manufacturer's pedigree.
So I guess when it comes to Beatles recordings, where there is a will, there will most likely be a way, although for how long is probably anyone's guess.
Now, I'd like to discuss what at least one entity is doing about the above.
Dr. Ebbett's-whomever or whatever-is currently marketing a Beatles back catalogue that should give new meaning to the term "free enterprise."
"Free," as in the DR.E entity markets it's releases free from royalties even though some of it's releases bare the corporate logo of Capitol Records, and "enterprise," as in this DR.E outfit is peddling so many titles it will make even a confirmed Beatlemaniac's head spin.
Currently-and I guess if you know where to look-you can get every single original Beatles LP release on CD, and all with faithfully reproduced art work and liner notes.
So that means you can get the United Artists issue of A Hard Day's Night in mono or stereo-although UA never did have a true stereo master with which to produce a stereo record-as well as the Capitol version of Help!, with it's insipid movie score filler.
Even though most of the Beatles "stereo" Capitol releases right up to Magical Mystery Tour were either not stereo or mock stereo that sounded crappy, all are available from Dr. Ebbett's.
Good God, you can even get a mono and a stereo version of The Beatles Story!
(File under get a life, even for completists!)
But the good doctor does have some rather interesting curios on the menu, and the one that caught my eye was an apparent finished package of The Beatles Live at the Hollywood Bowl, a single album with distinct art work, including a complete 1964 concert, and dating to 1964 and 1966 described as a "Capitol project."
The Beatle Rarities album is also available, which contains mixes of several songs that are unavailable anywhere else, including Penny Lane with the extra horn notes.
Many fans may find such offerings quite unresistable, regardless of their manufacturer's pedigree.
So I guess when it comes to Beatles recordings, where there is a will, there will most likely be a way, although for how long is probably anyone's guess.
Saturday, December 27, 2003
Beatle Bits #90
Well, I trust you and yours had a wonderful Christmas time, and got everything you deserved.
And speaking of deserved, I'd say the fans of the Beatles are most deserving of a remastered back catalogue, now some 17 years after the initial offerings of digital drek.
So I direct you to the current issue of Beatlology magazine that contains a very revealing interview with remastering specialist, Steve Hoffman.
In the interview conducted by Michael Hart-and for the first time that I have ever heard about it-Hoffman says that a simple misunderstanding led to the first 4 Fabs albums being issued in mono only on CD.
According to Hoffman, Apple first mastered Please Please Me, With The Beatles, Beatles For Sale, and A Hard Day's Night in stereo.
Hoffman says that George Martin then told Apple that PPM and WTB should be mastered in mono only.
Then, according to Hoffman, Apple mistakenly went ahead and remastered all 4 LPs in mono, despite the fact that excellent 4 track stereo multi-reels of BFS and AHDN existed.
The mistake, says Hoffman, has never been corrected.
Hoffman also says that he thinks the worst sounding Beatle recording is With The Beatles, and the best, interestingly enough, is Beatles Four Sale.
Hoffman bemoans the fact that although there were some great stereo pressings of Beatle albums -by Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab-including BFS in glorious stereo-these versions are not commercially available.
When asked what he would do if he was given the task of redoing the Beatles catalogue, Hoffman said that the most important thing would be to play the remaster tapes back on the correct tube playback deck they were originally intended to be played on. He calls this form of remastering "straight."
Pulling no punches, Hoffman says he "can't stand" the CD mixes done by George Martin, especially Rubber Soul, and that no "electronic gizmos" should be used to master any future Beatle CDs.
Hoffman gives an intriguing answer when asked about possible SACD or DVD-A Surround Sound resissues of Fabs back catalogue.
"Sigh," said Hoffman. "Let's get the originals out first!"
Those interested in more remastering details would do well to pick up the Nov./Dec issue of Beatlology, on sale now.
And speaking of deserved, I'd say the fans of the Beatles are most deserving of a remastered back catalogue, now some 17 years after the initial offerings of digital drek.
So I direct you to the current issue of Beatlology magazine that contains a very revealing interview with remastering specialist, Steve Hoffman.
In the interview conducted by Michael Hart-and for the first time that I have ever heard about it-Hoffman says that a simple misunderstanding led to the first 4 Fabs albums being issued in mono only on CD.
According to Hoffman, Apple first mastered Please Please Me, With The Beatles, Beatles For Sale, and A Hard Day's Night in stereo.
Hoffman says that George Martin then told Apple that PPM and WTB should be mastered in mono only.
Then, according to Hoffman, Apple mistakenly went ahead and remastered all 4 LPs in mono, despite the fact that excellent 4 track stereo multi-reels of BFS and AHDN existed.
The mistake, says Hoffman, has never been corrected.
Hoffman also says that he thinks the worst sounding Beatle recording is With The Beatles, and the best, interestingly enough, is Beatles Four Sale.
Hoffman bemoans the fact that although there were some great stereo pressings of Beatle albums -by Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab-including BFS in glorious stereo-these versions are not commercially available.
When asked what he would do if he was given the task of redoing the Beatles catalogue, Hoffman said that the most important thing would be to play the remaster tapes back on the correct tube playback deck they were originally intended to be played on. He calls this form of remastering "straight."
Pulling no punches, Hoffman says he "can't stand" the CD mixes done by George Martin, especially Rubber Soul, and that no "electronic gizmos" should be used to master any future Beatle CDs.
Hoffman gives an intriguing answer when asked about possible SACD or DVD-A Surround Sound resissues of Fabs back catalogue.
"Sigh," said Hoffman. "Let's get the originals out first!"
Those interested in more remastering details would do well to pick up the Nov./Dec issue of Beatlology, on sale now.
Wednesday, December 24, 2003
Beatle Bits #89
In the spirit of Santa makin' a list and checkin' it twice, I present my all time top 10 Beatle releases:
1/ The White Album Mono/Stereo
To me, the easy winner in a fleld of possible number 1's. The mono gets a mention because it is just so damn interesting to listen to, even if it is a little rougher and unpolished than the more common stereo version.
2/ Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band Mono/Stereo
See above.
3/ Revolver
The best non-themed Beatle album.
4/ Rubber Soul
The best Dylan themed Beatle album.
5/ Magical Mystery Tour
The first Beatle record to get bad press, but this is still a psychedelic masterpiece.
6/ Abbey Road
The best Beatle album ever produced by George Martin.
7/ Help/EMI&Capitol versions
The last great pop album by the Fabs.
8/ Let it Be/Spector/Johns
The various incarnations of Let it Be/Get Back are a lot of fun to listen to.
9/ Live at the Hollywood Bowl
PUT OUT ON CD NOW!
10/ A Hard Day's Night/EMI & UA versions
Going on 40 years old!
And that kiddies, is my X-Mas list.
1/ The White Album Mono/Stereo
To me, the easy winner in a fleld of possible number 1's. The mono gets a mention because it is just so damn interesting to listen to, even if it is a little rougher and unpolished than the more common stereo version.
2/ Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band Mono/Stereo
See above.
3/ Revolver
The best non-themed Beatle album.
4/ Rubber Soul
The best Dylan themed Beatle album.
5/ Magical Mystery Tour
The first Beatle record to get bad press, but this is still a psychedelic masterpiece.
6/ Abbey Road
The best Beatle album ever produced by George Martin.
7/ Help/EMI&Capitol versions
The last great pop album by the Fabs.
8/ Let it Be/Spector/Johns
The various incarnations of Let it Be/Get Back are a lot of fun to listen to.
9/ Live at the Hollywood Bowl
PUT OUT ON CD NOW!
10/ A Hard Day's Night/EMI & UA versions
Going on 40 years old!
And that kiddies, is my X-Mas list.
Tuesday, December 23, 2003
Beatle Bits #88
Ever since Apple/EMI made the decision in 1986 to only release the UK versions of original Beatles albums on CD, there has been an ongoing debate from fans in North America about possible future Fabs releases.
Some fans would like to have the opportunity to buy all of the original NA album issues, because that was what they grew up listening to, and even the covers of those original LPs are also beloved in many fan's minds.
As far as I can tell, we have actually had 2 releases that duplicated original NA albums-the Red 1962-66 and Blue 1967-70 greatest hits doubles that were originally released in 1973 on vinyl.
Many fans have asked for Hey Jude, Rock'n Roll Music and Love Songs, all collections that sold well here in Canada and the United States.
It is my belief that eventually, many of these sets will be released, and the single albums may be offered as two-fers, similar to the treatment given the Beach Boys back catalogue 10 years ago.
However-and in my opinion-there is one Beatle release that should never have a CD release, and that is The Beatles Story.
This double LP is-I believe-the worst selling capitol Beatle albums of all, and is mostly comprised of interviews and story telling and mere snippets of music.
However, just because the album is not very good is no reason to believe it could not one day turn up in your music store.
After all, it does say "the Beatles" on it.
But I remember how disappointed I was when I first heard it about 40 years ago, and I wonder how Fabs fans would receive a release of this turkey today.
Oh well, it is Christmas.
Some fans would like to have the opportunity to buy all of the original NA album issues, because that was what they grew up listening to, and even the covers of those original LPs are also beloved in many fan's minds.
As far as I can tell, we have actually had 2 releases that duplicated original NA albums-the Red 1962-66 and Blue 1967-70 greatest hits doubles that were originally released in 1973 on vinyl.
Many fans have asked for Hey Jude, Rock'n Roll Music and Love Songs, all collections that sold well here in Canada and the United States.
It is my belief that eventually, many of these sets will be released, and the single albums may be offered as two-fers, similar to the treatment given the Beach Boys back catalogue 10 years ago.
However-and in my opinion-there is one Beatle release that should never have a CD release, and that is The Beatles Story.
This double LP is-I believe-the worst selling capitol Beatle albums of all, and is mostly comprised of interviews and story telling and mere snippets of music.
However, just because the album is not very good is no reason to believe it could not one day turn up in your music store.
After all, it does say "the Beatles" on it.
But I remember how disappointed I was when I first heard it about 40 years ago, and I wonder how Fabs fans would receive a release of this turkey today.
Oh well, it is Christmas.
Monday, December 22, 2003
Beatle Bits #87
I want to tell you about a personal 1964 Beatlemania moment.
Just before the Fabs played for the first time in Toronto, 40 miles away from my hometown, my friend Greg and I decided that we had what it took to be Beatles ourselves.
It all started when my parents had gone out for the day, and my buddy and I went rummaging through the basement looking for trouble.
Instead, we found a bunch of high-heeled boots that my grandmother had worn perhaps 20 or 30 years ago.
Hmmm, we said. these things look like-what else-Beatle boots!
They were dark colored and one pair had just the right heel length, with the other being a little high for men's wear. But they were small enough to sort of fir our 9 year old feet.
Then, we got the great idea that we should dress up as two of the Fabs, and walk into the small town that was close to our neighborhood.
I grabbed two of my suit coats from the closet, and we put on ties and tried to get them done up right.
However, there was a major problem with our hair: both of us looked more like US Marines than Beatles.
And there was only one Beatle wig.
So I agreed to wear the high heeled faux Beatle boots, but got the Beatle wig.
I may have been the first Beatle impersonated to look like I was doing it in drag.
No matter, we both though we were so cool,until all the kids started laughing at me wobbling along in heels, so the whole comical exercise fell apart pretty quick. In fact, I think we were lucky we did not get beat up!
What's worse, by the time we got back to my house, my parents had arrived home, and were not amused.
But what I remember most is just how important my friend and I thought we were going to be dressed as Beatles.
Hard to believe that close to 40 years have gone by.
Just before the Fabs played for the first time in Toronto, 40 miles away from my hometown, my friend Greg and I decided that we had what it took to be Beatles ourselves.
It all started when my parents had gone out for the day, and my buddy and I went rummaging through the basement looking for trouble.
Instead, we found a bunch of high-heeled boots that my grandmother had worn perhaps 20 or 30 years ago.
Hmmm, we said. these things look like-what else-Beatle boots!
They were dark colored and one pair had just the right heel length, with the other being a little high for men's wear. But they were small enough to sort of fir our 9 year old feet.
Then, we got the great idea that we should dress up as two of the Fabs, and walk into the small town that was close to our neighborhood.
I grabbed two of my suit coats from the closet, and we put on ties and tried to get them done up right.
However, there was a major problem with our hair: both of us looked more like US Marines than Beatles.
And there was only one Beatle wig.
So I agreed to wear the high heeled faux Beatle boots, but got the Beatle wig.
I may have been the first Beatle impersonated to look like I was doing it in drag.
No matter, we both though we were so cool,until all the kids started laughing at me wobbling along in heels, so the whole comical exercise fell apart pretty quick. In fact, I think we were lucky we did not get beat up!
What's worse, by the time we got back to my house, my parents had arrived home, and were not amused.
But what I remember most is just how important my friend and I thought we were going to be dressed as Beatles.
Hard to believe that close to 40 years have gone by.
Sunday, December 21, 2003
Beatle Bits #86
Seeing as it's Christmas time, I'd like to add another Beatles related recording to my master wish list of those that should be given a darn good remastering.
Wings Over America is one that should get a deluxe treatment in 2004, so listen up, all you Macca Madhatters out there.
I think that WOA is number 2 or 3 in the all time Fabs solo albums list and in Canada at least, is currently only available as a pricey import, with the same old lousy mastering which was done over 10 years ago.
This original 3 Lp set first released in late 1976, certainly deserves a new digital clean-up, and while they are are at it, how about some extra material?
Not sure if there would be any completely new songs to add as extras, but for sure there would be different versions of those already released, and it's always neat to hear different arrangements and tempos of a familiar song.
Although McCartney has released a ton of live stuff in the last 15 years, WOA is Macca at his live best, at least as far as his pipes go. Some may argue that his more modern band is superior to the old Wings, but that would be open to endless debate.
But I do know one thing that is bang on and not debatable is the exuberance of the album and how Paul and Wings take some rather mundane album tracks and turn'em loose like bats outta hell.
Ah, yesterday.
Wings Over America is one that should get a deluxe treatment in 2004, so listen up, all you Macca Madhatters out there.
I think that WOA is number 2 or 3 in the all time Fabs solo albums list and in Canada at least, is currently only available as a pricey import, with the same old lousy mastering which was done over 10 years ago.
This original 3 Lp set first released in late 1976, certainly deserves a new digital clean-up, and while they are are at it, how about some extra material?
Not sure if there would be any completely new songs to add as extras, but for sure there would be different versions of those already released, and it's always neat to hear different arrangements and tempos of a familiar song.
Although McCartney has released a ton of live stuff in the last 15 years, WOA is Macca at his live best, at least as far as his pipes go. Some may argue that his more modern band is superior to the old Wings, but that would be open to endless debate.
But I do know one thing that is bang on and not debatable is the exuberance of the album and how Paul and Wings take some rather mundane album tracks and turn'em loose like bats outta hell.
Ah, yesterday.
Saturday, December 20, 2003
Beatle Bits #85
Don't look now, but a wild card may have been dealt those of us clamoring for a new generation of Beatle remasters.
And that card could belong to Walmart.
Already bigger in bucks than some third world country GNPs, Walmart announced that they would be competing directly against Apple Computer iTunes service, for downloadable music.
Walmart will be of course undercutting Apple and all other Internet music providers, with 88 cent songs.
So let's put two and two together, and see if we get 4 as in Fab.
Apple Music is suing Apple Computer over Apple Computers being in the music deliver biz.
The Beatles catalogue is way, way overdue for a rejig.
So what better way would there be for Apple/Beatles to get back at Apple/Computers and seize the day in Internet provided music selling?
After all, an exclusive download deal between Apple/Beatles and Walmart would conceivably be worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and would jump start Walmart to first place in the Internet music delivery business.
Plus, Walmart would be able to do something that would be much tougher for Apple/Comp to do: provide a place to pick up artwork and other materials that could be provided as part of the download package.
Walmart could have the whole clicks and bricks equation tied up, with the Fabs as their marquee product.
Now of course all of the above is pure speculation but what with the Rolling Stones and other big bands striking up exclusive distrib deals with major chains in North America, why wouldn't Apple/Beatles want to see a max return on their wares?
And a download back catalogue reissue with a minor tweaking would solve the sticky question of SACD or SA-CD format wars, allowing those projects to appear after the winner of the high end audio way is known.
I'd venture that most fans would be happy if the Beatle songs sounded as good as the 1 collection does, which uses modern digital mastering as opposed to the drek still sold and heard on most other Beatle albums currently available.
Once again, you may say that I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.
Or in other words, tomorrow never knows...
And that card could belong to Walmart.
Already bigger in bucks than some third world country GNPs, Walmart announced that they would be competing directly against Apple Computer iTunes service, for downloadable music.
Walmart will be of course undercutting Apple and all other Internet music providers, with 88 cent songs.
So let's put two and two together, and see if we get 4 as in Fab.
Apple Music is suing Apple Computer over Apple Computers being in the music deliver biz.
The Beatles catalogue is way, way overdue for a rejig.
So what better way would there be for Apple/Beatles to get back at Apple/Computers and seize the day in Internet provided music selling?
After all, an exclusive download deal between Apple/Beatles and Walmart would conceivably be worth hundreds of millions of dollars, and would jump start Walmart to first place in the Internet music delivery business.
Plus, Walmart would be able to do something that would be much tougher for Apple/Comp to do: provide a place to pick up artwork and other materials that could be provided as part of the download package.
Walmart could have the whole clicks and bricks equation tied up, with the Fabs as their marquee product.
Now of course all of the above is pure speculation but what with the Rolling Stones and other big bands striking up exclusive distrib deals with major chains in North America, why wouldn't Apple/Beatles want to see a max return on their wares?
And a download back catalogue reissue with a minor tweaking would solve the sticky question of SACD or SA-CD format wars, allowing those projects to appear after the winner of the high end audio way is known.
I'd venture that most fans would be happy if the Beatle songs sounded as good as the 1 collection does, which uses modern digital mastering as opposed to the drek still sold and heard on most other Beatle albums currently available.
Once again, you may say that I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.
Or in other words, tomorrow never knows...
Friday, December 19, 2003
Beatle Bits #84
One of the albums I have been listening to lately is the original Yellow Submarine.
The one that will next year be 35 years old, and the one with a whole side's worth of George Martin led orchestra music.
I specify the YS album because Beatle fans know that since 1999, the original Yellow Submarine album has been supplanted by the un-original Yellow Submarine Songtrack that unnecessarily axed the instrumental side of the 1969 version.
And while the Songtrack was welcome for it's remastered sound and added tunes, the CD format of 80 minutes would have allowed for the inclusion of the GM score, and would have been an historically correct thing to do.
Although John Lennon was to comment that the Fabs knew nothing of the B side Martin opus until the album's release, I suspect that John's comment was another in a long line of Lennonisms that perhaps are not meant to be taken seriously.
Afterall, the YS movie had much of the Martin score on board, so it's not like it was foreign to the project.
Plus, the Martin music is kinda neat in a whimsical way.
And what's even more nostalgic for me, I have been listening to a mono transfer of the original YS. And even though most recording guides list the mono YS as a straight dub-down from a stereo master, I think the mono version I am enjoying is "better" sounding than the stereo counterpoint.
I always thought that the stereo YS sounded terrible, especially All Too Much, which was to me all too messy.
So for those of you that lament the retro-fitting done by Apple/EMI with the Yellow Submarine, I say, I'm with ya.
Especially, in back to mono.
The one that will next year be 35 years old, and the one with a whole side's worth of George Martin led orchestra music.
I specify the YS album because Beatle fans know that since 1999, the original Yellow Submarine album has been supplanted by the un-original Yellow Submarine Songtrack that unnecessarily axed the instrumental side of the 1969 version.
And while the Songtrack was welcome for it's remastered sound and added tunes, the CD format of 80 minutes would have allowed for the inclusion of the GM score, and would have been an historically correct thing to do.
Although John Lennon was to comment that the Fabs knew nothing of the B side Martin opus until the album's release, I suspect that John's comment was another in a long line of Lennonisms that perhaps are not meant to be taken seriously.
Afterall, the YS movie had much of the Martin score on board, so it's not like it was foreign to the project.
Plus, the Martin music is kinda neat in a whimsical way.
And what's even more nostalgic for me, I have been listening to a mono transfer of the original YS. And even though most recording guides list the mono YS as a straight dub-down from a stereo master, I think the mono version I am enjoying is "better" sounding than the stereo counterpoint.
I always thought that the stereo YS sounded terrible, especially All Too Much, which was to me all too messy.
So for those of you that lament the retro-fitting done by Apple/EMI with the Yellow Submarine, I say, I'm with ya.
Especially, in back to mono.
Thursday, December 18, 2003
Beatle Bits #83
I got a neat, little, cheeky e-mail the other day in response to my Beatle re-mixers get-a-life BB rant.
The e-mailer enquired-and quite rational me thinks-whether it was I who had not majorally lost in the go=get=a=life sweeps because here I was laboring over a daily column on a group that split up 33 years ago.
Ouch, but, hey; fair comment.
Yet it got me thinking about why I believe I can come up with something worthwhile to write about on the Fabs every 24 and 7.
And that would be: Ta-da! THE MUSIC.
What's that hamburger commercial say, "I'm lovin' it?"
Yeah that would be true, because once again my good friend Richard from the good old USA has come through with some tasty mono transfers.
For the past day or so, I have been immersed in clean, mono versions of perhaps the two "best" Beatle albums, Rubber Soul and Revolver.
Repeated listenings of the two recordings validate why I think it is worthwhile to write each day for Fabs fans.
I was 10 and 11 respectively when the two platters appeared in 1965 and 1966, and they can be like comfort food, bringing back floods of feelings and emotions-mostly warm and fuzzy.
Plus, the records are just so damn good and sophisticated, that I can really dig why I used to think that being a fan was such a cool and righteous thing to be.
I mean, I don't know how kids of 10 today feel about Eminem or some other reprobate-like rapper, but the Beatles made me feel grown up, not left wanting to throw up.
These records are not perfect-which ones are- but they certainly show what good can be achieved out of a piece of plastic, rather than some of the depressing. vile, sheit that is offered up today.
Sure there were lots of bummer things happening in the "good old days," but pop music was fun at the time.
The Beatles music from 1965 and 1966 is just so darn hopeful.
Beep, beep, beep,beep, yeah!
The e-mailer enquired-and quite rational me thinks-whether it was I who had not majorally lost in the go=get=a=life sweeps because here I was laboring over a daily column on a group that split up 33 years ago.
Ouch, but, hey; fair comment.
Yet it got me thinking about why I believe I can come up with something worthwhile to write about on the Fabs every 24 and 7.
And that would be: Ta-da! THE MUSIC.
What's that hamburger commercial say, "I'm lovin' it?"
Yeah that would be true, because once again my good friend Richard from the good old USA has come through with some tasty mono transfers.
For the past day or so, I have been immersed in clean, mono versions of perhaps the two "best" Beatle albums, Rubber Soul and Revolver.
Repeated listenings of the two recordings validate why I think it is worthwhile to write each day for Fabs fans.
I was 10 and 11 respectively when the two platters appeared in 1965 and 1966, and they can be like comfort food, bringing back floods of feelings and emotions-mostly warm and fuzzy.
Plus, the records are just so damn good and sophisticated, that I can really dig why I used to think that being a fan was such a cool and righteous thing to be.
I mean, I don't know how kids of 10 today feel about Eminem or some other reprobate-like rapper, but the Beatles made me feel grown up, not left wanting to throw up.
These records are not perfect-which ones are- but they certainly show what good can be achieved out of a piece of plastic, rather than some of the depressing. vile, sheit that is offered up today.
Sure there were lots of bummer things happening in the "good old days," but pop music was fun at the time.
The Beatles music from 1965 and 1966 is just so darn hopeful.
Beep, beep, beep,beep, yeah!
Wednesday, December 17, 2003
Beatle Bits #82
I don't think that I actually used the word "never" in regards not writing about the "failed 1974-6 Beatles reunion tape," but I'm sure I did say that as far as I was concerned the tale had a fork stuck in it as in done.
Well, I may have been too hasty, and I may have known better.
I said to a colleague a couple weeks ago that even Gary Zimet-he of the infamous Double Fantasy/Mark David Chapman LP peddler-would not touch this "reunion" tape "with a 10 foot pole."
Evidently, Zimet found at least an 11 footer because sure enough, up pops his name as a seller of this 'tape" in a story today in the New York Daily News.
Now, the Daily News may be tabloid, but it's not a fish wrap or a bullshit scooper as far as I know, so I can't really figure this whole thing out.
The things that set off alarms for me on this "story"-nobody would talk, no real evidence- seemed not to alarm the writer for the News, even though he could not get any of the principals-including Paul McCartney-to comment. (Surprise, surprise!)
I supose the only "story" here would be the unlikely scenario of the group having been in the studio in 1974 or 1976 or whatever, because the tape has been admittedly erased!
But maybe an even bigger story would be how the whole thing was kept secret for nearly 30 years, even though it was supposedly a full fledged Beatle reunion with their original producer-George Martin-at the controls.
Richard Nixon's infamous "Plumber's Unit" that was supposed to be able to contain any leaks would have been swamped by this one.
No way, this would not have leaked-nay, raged- out.
Not to mention that if it were in 1974, George Harrison would have had to interupt his Dark Horse tour, and if in 1976, Paul would have had to bug out on Wings Over America.
And those 5 corny songs titles that I listed before, now have running times assigned to them, along with a lame explanation of why the the list sometimes included 6 songs.
If this "story" turns out to be true, then the Rutles surely were bigger than Rod.
Well, I may have been too hasty, and I may have known better.
I said to a colleague a couple weeks ago that even Gary Zimet-he of the infamous Double Fantasy/Mark David Chapman LP peddler-would not touch this "reunion" tape "with a 10 foot pole."
Evidently, Zimet found at least an 11 footer because sure enough, up pops his name as a seller of this 'tape" in a story today in the New York Daily News.
Now, the Daily News may be tabloid, but it's not a fish wrap or a bullshit scooper as far as I know, so I can't really figure this whole thing out.
The things that set off alarms for me on this "story"-nobody would talk, no real evidence- seemed not to alarm the writer for the News, even though he could not get any of the principals-including Paul McCartney-to comment. (Surprise, surprise!)
I supose the only "story" here would be the unlikely scenario of the group having been in the studio in 1974 or 1976 or whatever, because the tape has been admittedly erased!
But maybe an even bigger story would be how the whole thing was kept secret for nearly 30 years, even though it was supposedly a full fledged Beatle reunion with their original producer-George Martin-at the controls.
Richard Nixon's infamous "Plumber's Unit" that was supposed to be able to contain any leaks would have been swamped by this one.
No way, this would not have leaked-nay, raged- out.
Not to mention that if it were in 1974, George Harrison would have had to interupt his Dark Horse tour, and if in 1976, Paul would have had to bug out on Wings Over America.
And those 5 corny songs titles that I listed before, now have running times assigned to them, along with a lame explanation of why the the list sometimes included 6 songs.
If this "story" turns out to be true, then the Rutles surely were bigger than Rod.
Tuesday, December 16, 2003
Beatle Bits #81
When does being a fan of the Beatles become an "obsession"?
Now I'm not talking about obsession as in sick, but rather obsessed as in overly preoccupied with the really minor minutiae of the Fabs careers and times.
Or to put it another way:the idea that some need to get a life? Too strong?
Well what got me thinking about this whole ball of recorded wax is an Internet group that specializes in "remixing" Beatle tracks.
I belong to this group-I know, I know,so does that mean I need to get a life?-out of curiosity really, to see how far some of these fans will go with what may appear to most be down right silly.
For instance, today,a group member and sleuthy remixer isolated a Paul McCartney backing vocal to the song When I Get Home, and asked if Macca was not perhaps a bit off in one of his verses.
Now I have to admit to you I did take the link to the audio and yes, the remixer was probably right, it did sound as if Paul may have laid a bit of an audio lemon way back there in 1963, but, you know ,like who the hell cares?
When you start going through Beatle tracks and stripping them apart as many in this particular group do to come up with different "mixes" of Beatle songs, I think it may be a past time right up there with naval gazing and watching Survivor;to wit, a waste of time.
In any event, I would imagine that "remixers," armed with increasingly sophisticated PC audio editing tools will be coming up with all sorts of new goodies, such as when Ringo Star's cell phone rang during the recording of With A Little Help From My Friends in 1967, as well as the time McCartney was heard to order a Big Mac during the first lunch break of Hey Jude.
Or even the time at Abbey Road Studios that Paul had too much tea, and was forced to scurry to the bathroom in between beats of The Fool On The Hill, and the resulting flush can be extracted by playing the thing backwards whilst flushing your own commode.
Ah, what WILL they think of next?
Now I'm not talking about obsession as in sick, but rather obsessed as in overly preoccupied with the really minor minutiae of the Fabs careers and times.
Or to put it another way:the idea that some need to get a life? Too strong?
Well what got me thinking about this whole ball of recorded wax is an Internet group that specializes in "remixing" Beatle tracks.
I belong to this group-I know, I know,so does that mean I need to get a life?-out of curiosity really, to see how far some of these fans will go with what may appear to most be down right silly.
For instance, today,a group member and sleuthy remixer isolated a Paul McCartney backing vocal to the song When I Get Home, and asked if Macca was not perhaps a bit off in one of his verses.
Now I have to admit to you I did take the link to the audio and yes, the remixer was probably right, it did sound as if Paul may have laid a bit of an audio lemon way back there in 1963, but, you know ,like who the hell cares?
When you start going through Beatle tracks and stripping them apart as many in this particular group do to come up with different "mixes" of Beatle songs, I think it may be a past time right up there with naval gazing and watching Survivor;to wit, a waste of time.
In any event, I would imagine that "remixers," armed with increasingly sophisticated PC audio editing tools will be coming up with all sorts of new goodies, such as when Ringo Star's cell phone rang during the recording of With A Little Help From My Friends in 1967, as well as the time McCartney was heard to order a Big Mac during the first lunch break of Hey Jude.
Or even the time at Abbey Road Studios that Paul had too much tea, and was forced to scurry to the bathroom in between beats of The Fool On The Hill, and the resulting flush can be extracted by playing the thing backwards whilst flushing your own commode.
Ah, what WILL they think of next?
Monday, December 15, 2003
Beatle Bits #80
One of the things that made the partnership between the Beatles and their producer George Martin a good one, was Martin's seemingly flawless ability to decide what should and should not get released.
And Martin was also smart enough to stay away from perhaps the most embarrassing part of the Beatles collective recordings, that being the 1963-69 Beatles Christmas records.
I think it was a member of the Eagles-who took the time to go and record a fairly substantial X-Mas tune-that said that the Beatles used to go into the studio at Christmas time and "fart" and put it out for the fans.
The inference being that the lads could not be bothered to actually do a real Christmas record-although the 1968 "Christmas Time is Here Again" may qualify-and that the Fabs owed their fans more.
I guess there would be some truth to the notion that the Beatles could have done more.
They could have covered some Christmas standards, or even composed some of their own.
But that was not the way the thing unfolded, as the Beatles did the throw away's for their fan club only, and not for general release.
In fact, the majority of Beatles fans have never even heard the sometimes bizarre and sometimes down right stupid Christmas "songs," that were last released as a promo only compilation in 1970.
Most of the "Christmas" records were recorded a good a month or so from Christmas, usually late at night after a long recording session, and the quality of the recording are as one would expect.
Yet, some hardcore fans clamor for an official release of these crazy recordings that definately show the Fabs with their pants down.
I don't think George Martin would give it the thumbs up.
What do you think?
And Martin was also smart enough to stay away from perhaps the most embarrassing part of the Beatles collective recordings, that being the 1963-69 Beatles Christmas records.
I think it was a member of the Eagles-who took the time to go and record a fairly substantial X-Mas tune-that said that the Beatles used to go into the studio at Christmas time and "fart" and put it out for the fans.
The inference being that the lads could not be bothered to actually do a real Christmas record-although the 1968 "Christmas Time is Here Again" may qualify-and that the Fabs owed their fans more.
I guess there would be some truth to the notion that the Beatles could have done more.
They could have covered some Christmas standards, or even composed some of their own.
But that was not the way the thing unfolded, as the Beatles did the throw away's for their fan club only, and not for general release.
In fact, the majority of Beatles fans have never even heard the sometimes bizarre and sometimes down right stupid Christmas "songs," that were last released as a promo only compilation in 1970.
Most of the "Christmas" records were recorded a good a month or so from Christmas, usually late at night after a long recording session, and the quality of the recording are as one would expect.
Yet, some hardcore fans clamor for an official release of these crazy recordings that definately show the Fabs with their pants down.
I don't think George Martin would give it the thumbs up.
What do you think?
Sunday, December 14, 2003
Beatle Bits #79
Do you have a favorite Beatle memory at Christmas?
I have three. 1964, 1965, and 1970.
1964: Beatlemania was still a major force in North America, and the world for that matter.
For the only time in my life, I spent Christmas outside of Canada, visiting relatives in the Los Angeles area.
My family and I did all the tourist things, including going to the first shopping mall-The Farmer's Market-and I bought a copy of Beatles 65 from the biggest record store I had ever seen.
When I got back home, I bragged to my friends that I had an American copy.
1965: Although the blush was off the rose a little bit when it came to the Fabs compared to 1964, there was still loads of excitement over the Lads latest release, Rubber Soul. Of course, the record was what I put first on my X-Mas list, and I also remember endless discussions between my friends on the significance of the cover.
I'll be willing to wager that Rubber Soul was perhaps the most "gifted" Beatle album of all.
1970: To me, Christmas 1970 was the George Harrison My Sweet Lord Christmas. Everywhere you went, it seemed that My Sweet Lord, or it's flip Isn't It A Pity, was playing.
Weird thing is, I never got All Things Must Pass as a gift, or even bought it myself with Christmas cash, but rather picked up the MSL single.
I'll never forget my cousin who was about 21 at the time, doing a solitary dance to MSL as it played on the stereo in our living room on Christmas eve and my mother sat in a chair looking bemused.
I was too shy to join him, but I sure thought he was cool.
Please share your Beatle Christmas memories with me when you get the chance, and I'll collect up the most interesting for a BB shortly before the 25th.
I have three. 1964, 1965, and 1970.
1964: Beatlemania was still a major force in North America, and the world for that matter.
For the only time in my life, I spent Christmas outside of Canada, visiting relatives in the Los Angeles area.
My family and I did all the tourist things, including going to the first shopping mall-The Farmer's Market-and I bought a copy of Beatles 65 from the biggest record store I had ever seen.
When I got back home, I bragged to my friends that I had an American copy.
1965: Although the blush was off the rose a little bit when it came to the Fabs compared to 1964, there was still loads of excitement over the Lads latest release, Rubber Soul. Of course, the record was what I put first on my X-Mas list, and I also remember endless discussions between my friends on the significance of the cover.
I'll be willing to wager that Rubber Soul was perhaps the most "gifted" Beatle album of all.
1970: To me, Christmas 1970 was the George Harrison My Sweet Lord Christmas. Everywhere you went, it seemed that My Sweet Lord, or it's flip Isn't It A Pity, was playing.
Weird thing is, I never got All Things Must Pass as a gift, or even bought it myself with Christmas cash, but rather picked up the MSL single.
I'll never forget my cousin who was about 21 at the time, doing a solitary dance to MSL as it played on the stereo in our living room on Christmas eve and my mother sat in a chair looking bemused.
I was too shy to join him, but I sure thought he was cool.
Please share your Beatle Christmas memories with me when you get the chance, and I'll collect up the most interesting for a BB shortly before the 25th.
Saturday, December 13, 2003
Beatle Bits #78
In a previous column, I lamented some Beatle stuff I had, but either sold, gave away lost or had thrown out.
Now, I want to talk about some things I could have got, but didn't.
In my hometown in Canada, there were not too many dedicated record stores, but rather department stores that also happened to sell records.
Most of these large stores sold Beatle LPs for about $4-5, and singles for 69 cents, right up to the mid to later 60s.
No one I knew bought their Beatle records from any of the specialty records stores because they were always more expensive.
But in 1968, when Capitol Records nee Apple decided not to sell mono versions of Beatle records in North America anymore, this one downtown record store had imported English mono copies of the White Album for the unheard of price of $9.99!
These were the ones with the gloss cover and embossed numbers.
I seem to recall that one sort of snobbish rich kid I knew talked his parents into giving him a 10 spot to buy the double album, although at that time none of us knew the difference between mono and stereo except that stereo copies always cost more, except for this one.
Two years later, I would recall walking through the local department store next to my highschool and seeing racks of Let it Be boxsets for $7.99.
Even for the spring of 1970, $7.99 for a single record was way too much for most kids to afford, so I remember that most of us bought Hey Jude instead, for $4.99.
Bad choice!
Many of you are aware that a mint copy of the Let it Be box and book would command around $250 and a sealed one would be closer to $500.
And the imported mono White Album could be worth at least a $100, even in less than great shape.
So for less than $20, I could have had around $600 worth of Beatle booty.
Have you ever passed up similar opportunities?
Let me know.
Now, I want to talk about some things I could have got, but didn't.
In my hometown in Canada, there were not too many dedicated record stores, but rather department stores that also happened to sell records.
Most of these large stores sold Beatle LPs for about $4-5, and singles for 69 cents, right up to the mid to later 60s.
No one I knew bought their Beatle records from any of the specialty records stores because they were always more expensive.
But in 1968, when Capitol Records nee Apple decided not to sell mono versions of Beatle records in North America anymore, this one downtown record store had imported English mono copies of the White Album for the unheard of price of $9.99!
These were the ones with the gloss cover and embossed numbers.
I seem to recall that one sort of snobbish rich kid I knew talked his parents into giving him a 10 spot to buy the double album, although at that time none of us knew the difference between mono and stereo except that stereo copies always cost more, except for this one.
Two years later, I would recall walking through the local department store next to my highschool and seeing racks of Let it Be boxsets for $7.99.
Even for the spring of 1970, $7.99 for a single record was way too much for most kids to afford, so I remember that most of us bought Hey Jude instead, for $4.99.
Bad choice!
Many of you are aware that a mint copy of the Let it Be box and book would command around $250 and a sealed one would be closer to $500.
And the imported mono White Album could be worth at least a $100, even in less than great shape.
So for less than $20, I could have had around $600 worth of Beatle booty.
Have you ever passed up similar opportunities?
Let me know.
Friday, December 12, 2003
Beatle Bits #77
"Many people regard the Beatles as gods and the selling of this thing invokes bad memories in many peoples minds. They would rather just forget me."
I had hoped also, that I could forget about the speaker above-Gary Zimet, who has since 1998 been associated with trying to sell the Double Fantasy album that John Lennon signed for Mark David Chapman shortly before Chapman shot Lennon to death-but late news out of New Jersey has dictated I provide an update, and some history.
The New Jersey Herald is reporting that a Newton, NJ judge has granted in injunction until at least Jan. 9, 2004, preventing Zimet or anyone else from selling the album in question.
The legal action was brought by an attorney representing the "original" owner of the record, Philip Michael-now deceased according to the Herald-who found the album in a bush near the murder scene, shortly after Lennon was killed.
According to the Herald article, the attorney is disputing if Zimet actually ever sold the album-that Zimet told me in an interview 5 years ago he sold for $460,000- in Jan. 1999 for Michael, as Zimet has publicly claimed.
In my Jan 1999 story, Zimet who operates Moments In Time, an Internet auction house, told me that the winning bidder was "a 38-year-old wealthy investment broker from the western United States," and that the man was " a huge Beatles fan and collector."
Zimet, from Washingtonville, New York, made the statement about the Beatles being gods twice, both times in stories I wrote for the Canadian newspaper the National Post in late 1998 and 1999.
As I have noted in a previous BB, I was never really able to find out if the album had actually been sold, and repeated attempts to interview Michael were fruitless.
Zimet has been making the rounds of major media since late in November when the AP picked up the story of the album's potential sale.
However, nothing that I read or saw made any mention of a previous sale, or that the "original" owner had passed away.
Zimet told me that he had orginally placed the value of the album at $1.8 million, in a story in the USA Today in the summer of 1998.
My feeling is that this particular piece of notorious plastic and cardboard will remain justifiably jinxed, and not "sold" any time soon.
I had hoped also, that I could forget about the speaker above-Gary Zimet, who has since 1998 been associated with trying to sell the Double Fantasy album that John Lennon signed for Mark David Chapman shortly before Chapman shot Lennon to death-but late news out of New Jersey has dictated I provide an update, and some history.
The New Jersey Herald is reporting that a Newton, NJ judge has granted in injunction until at least Jan. 9, 2004, preventing Zimet or anyone else from selling the album in question.
The legal action was brought by an attorney representing the "original" owner of the record, Philip Michael-now deceased according to the Herald-who found the album in a bush near the murder scene, shortly after Lennon was killed.
According to the Herald article, the attorney is disputing if Zimet actually ever sold the album-that Zimet told me in an interview 5 years ago he sold for $460,000- in Jan. 1999 for Michael, as Zimet has publicly claimed.
In my Jan 1999 story, Zimet who operates Moments In Time, an Internet auction house, told me that the winning bidder was "a 38-year-old wealthy investment broker from the western United States," and that the man was " a huge Beatles fan and collector."
Zimet, from Washingtonville, New York, made the statement about the Beatles being gods twice, both times in stories I wrote for the Canadian newspaper the National Post in late 1998 and 1999.
As I have noted in a previous BB, I was never really able to find out if the album had actually been sold, and repeated attempts to interview Michael were fruitless.
Zimet has been making the rounds of major media since late in November when the AP picked up the story of the album's potential sale.
However, nothing that I read or saw made any mention of a previous sale, or that the "original" owner had passed away.
Zimet told me that he had orginally placed the value of the album at $1.8 million, in a story in the USA Today in the summer of 1998.
My feeling is that this particular piece of notorious plastic and cardboard will remain justifiably jinxed, and not "sold" any time soon.
Thursday, December 11, 2003
Beatle Bits #76
During most of 1995, I produced and hosted a call in current events talk show for a community access station in my hometown.
It was loads of fun in that I could generally just think up a topic or an issue or idea, and then put a 1 hour live show on the air to a potential 10,000 viewers or so.
So being a Beatle fan, I took a couple of opportunities to get the Fabs on the air.
First, we had the guy from the Ontario anti-piracy and copyright office to talk about the evils of counterfeit video tapes.
Well, of course that gave me the opps to slide some Beatle bootleg CDs onto the air as "proof" of the terrible toll it was taking on legit record companies (!)
(This may have been the first time that cuts from the Unsurpassed Masters ever made it onto the TV in Canada.)
But after that show, I got a very well respected music critic from one of the top Toronto dailies to come on and rap about music.
The critic was a bit put off with me because I wanted to play boot cuts-after all the Anthology series was about to come out-and talk about how great the Fabs were, and so on and so forth.
(He also was paranoid that the record companies would stop being nice to him if he was seen as condoning boots or even cavorting around 'em.)
And yet the point I want to make to you is that this very hip critic actually said on the air that there WOULD be a band that would be as big, or bigger than the Beatles.
Really, He was serious, and appeared to be sober and not suffering from any apparent mental health problems.
I asked the critic with great incredulity just what that band would be, and it was one of those grunge type outfits that I can't even remember the name of now, but to suffice to say, the Fabs rep is still solid as Number 1 all time. Like, forever.
There may have been a time back in the early to mid 90s when being a Beatle fan-in some dummies minds- was not "cool" anymore.
Possibly Apple realized this-give credit when it is due- and hence Anthology and all the other stuff we have got in the last 10 years.
Hey! Maybe what we need to get more Beatle goodies is to get the hopeless twits who decide for us what is "cool" to declare the Fabs un-cool again.
Look what it got us the last time!
It was loads of fun in that I could generally just think up a topic or an issue or idea, and then put a 1 hour live show on the air to a potential 10,000 viewers or so.
So being a Beatle fan, I took a couple of opportunities to get the Fabs on the air.
First, we had the guy from the Ontario anti-piracy and copyright office to talk about the evils of counterfeit video tapes.
Well, of course that gave me the opps to slide some Beatle bootleg CDs onto the air as "proof" of the terrible toll it was taking on legit record companies (!)
(This may have been the first time that cuts from the Unsurpassed Masters ever made it onto the TV in Canada.)
But after that show, I got a very well respected music critic from one of the top Toronto dailies to come on and rap about music.
The critic was a bit put off with me because I wanted to play boot cuts-after all the Anthology series was about to come out-and talk about how great the Fabs were, and so on and so forth.
(He also was paranoid that the record companies would stop being nice to him if he was seen as condoning boots or even cavorting around 'em.)
And yet the point I want to make to you is that this very hip critic actually said on the air that there WOULD be a band that would be as big, or bigger than the Beatles.
Really, He was serious, and appeared to be sober and not suffering from any apparent mental health problems.
I asked the critic with great incredulity just what that band would be, and it was one of those grunge type outfits that I can't even remember the name of now, but to suffice to say, the Fabs rep is still solid as Number 1 all time. Like, forever.
There may have been a time back in the early to mid 90s when being a Beatle fan-in some dummies minds- was not "cool" anymore.
Possibly Apple realized this-give credit when it is due- and hence Anthology and all the other stuff we have got in the last 10 years.
Hey! Maybe what we need to get more Beatle goodies is to get the hopeless twits who decide for us what is "cool" to declare the Fabs un-cool again.
Look what it got us the last time!
Wednesday, December 10, 2003
Beatle Bits #75
I have to tell you that it is just so great getting feedback from Beatle fans.
Lately, I have received some great stuff from readers who have some fantastic tales to tell.
One reader was lucky enough to have been brought up in a home in which his father still retained his original mono copy of Sgt. Pepper!
This 2nd Gen Beatles fan has got some really incredible memories from his days as a new Fabs fan, even though he was only a mere 4 years old.
This fortunate kid never had to worry about not being able to decide if the stereo was as good or better than the mono, as he had the reference disc to start with!
I dearly wish I could say to you that I had the good common sense and foresight to hold onto all my Beatle records and memorabilia, but I would be lying if I did so.
All my original beatle records up to and including Rubber Soul: gone in a spring cleaning binge by my mother back around 1968.
And that goes for all of my picture sleeve 45s as well.
Plus, my ticket stub from the 1964 beatle show at Maple Leaf Gardens in Toronto, went gonzo about 1972. Ouch!
My Paul McCartney model kit? Busted about 1965.
My Beatle wig? Eaten by dog in 1966.
But you know the item I wanted most and never got?
Beatle wallpaper.
My dad would not allow it because he said the Beatles were "girly" and that worse, they were probably Communists intent on wrecking the morals of the Western world's youth.
I would enjoy hearing from any readers who were smart cookies and pack rats with their Beatles gear.
Lately, I have received some great stuff from readers who have some fantastic tales to tell.
One reader was lucky enough to have been brought up in a home in which his father still retained his original mono copy of Sgt. Pepper!
This 2nd Gen Beatles fan has got some really incredible memories from his days as a new Fabs fan, even though he was only a mere 4 years old.
This fortunate kid never had to worry about not being able to decide if the stereo was as good or better than the mono, as he had the reference disc to start with!
I dearly wish I could say to you that I had the good common sense and foresight to hold onto all my Beatle records and memorabilia, but I would be lying if I did so.
All my original beatle records up to and including Rubber Soul: gone in a spring cleaning binge by my mother back around 1968.
And that goes for all of my picture sleeve 45s as well.
Plus, my ticket stub from the 1964 beatle show at Maple Leaf Gardens in Toronto, went gonzo about 1972. Ouch!
My Paul McCartney model kit? Busted about 1965.
My Beatle wig? Eaten by dog in 1966.
But you know the item I wanted most and never got?
Beatle wallpaper.
My dad would not allow it because he said the Beatles were "girly" and that worse, they were probably Communists intent on wrecking the morals of the Western world's youth.
I would enjoy hearing from any readers who were smart cookies and pack rats with their Beatles gear.
Tuesday, December 09, 2003
Beatle Bits #74
One more discussion about the terrible events of Dec. 8, 1980, and then on to more hopeful notions leading up to Christmas 2003.
As far as I'm concerned there are two word couplets that explain the almost un-explainable and tragic death of John Lennon:
Gun Control
Mental Health
If there had been more stringent gun control in 1980 there is a distinct possibility that Mark David Chapman would have been not able to (legally) purchase the 38 caliber snub nosed revolver with which he shot and killed John Lennon.
A more detailed background check would have possibly turned up MDC's dubious metal health background, and may have denied him the weapon.
But there is also an old saying that is basically true and that is if someone wants a gun, they will get a gun, by hook or by crook.
Yet it is hard to envision the nerdy pin-head Chapman going out onto the mean streets to cop a weapon.
(Although because of the New York City area's strict gun control, MDC had to travel to Georgia to buy the bullets he used to sly Lennon. So one may also argue that this guy was determined no matter what.)
Still, on balance, I think tighter gun control may have stopped him, or at least slowed him down.
But gun or no gun, it is my opinion that the biggest factor in the idiotic and senseless death of John Lennon, was the lack of any real oversight over MDC's mental health.
If you read the book, Let Me Take You Down, you will see reams of psychiatric history on MDC. And, well, I'm no shrink, but even the most casual layperson of psych 101 could tell this guy Chapman was a walking time bomb.
Yet no doctor who examined MDC before the murder considered him "dangerous."
We would come to learn more about the narcissistic personality disorder that drove Chapman and John Hinkley, who would try to shoot President Reagan just 3 months after Lennon's death.
The cult of celebrity agitates these individuals to the point that they feel they must act on their sick and twisted beliefs.
In the case of Chapman, who has another parole hearing scheduled for next year, I doubt very much that his illness-which is one of the most difficult pysch disorders to treat or "cure"-has abated, no matter what he now claims.
I fear there are many more MDC's and Hinkley's running around out there on the loose.
Actually, it is amazing to me that more murderous incidents don't take place even with the heightened security awareness evident around stars since John's murder.
But then again, we were lucky not to have lost George Harrison a year before we did, at the hands at yet another "crazed" fan.
So if one can declare any positive thing from such a horrible act as Lennon's murder, it would be that maybe, just maybe, we have prevented other similar tragedy's with our increased vigilance.
But it was such a high price to pay.
John Lennon, RIP.
As far as I'm concerned there are two word couplets that explain the almost un-explainable and tragic death of John Lennon:
Gun Control
Mental Health
If there had been more stringent gun control in 1980 there is a distinct possibility that Mark David Chapman would have been not able to (legally) purchase the 38 caliber snub nosed revolver with which he shot and killed John Lennon.
A more detailed background check would have possibly turned up MDC's dubious metal health background, and may have denied him the weapon.
But there is also an old saying that is basically true and that is if someone wants a gun, they will get a gun, by hook or by crook.
Yet it is hard to envision the nerdy pin-head Chapman going out onto the mean streets to cop a weapon.
(Although because of the New York City area's strict gun control, MDC had to travel to Georgia to buy the bullets he used to sly Lennon. So one may also argue that this guy was determined no matter what.)
Still, on balance, I think tighter gun control may have stopped him, or at least slowed him down.
But gun or no gun, it is my opinion that the biggest factor in the idiotic and senseless death of John Lennon, was the lack of any real oversight over MDC's mental health.
If you read the book, Let Me Take You Down, you will see reams of psychiatric history on MDC. And, well, I'm no shrink, but even the most casual layperson of psych 101 could tell this guy Chapman was a walking time bomb.
Yet no doctor who examined MDC before the murder considered him "dangerous."
We would come to learn more about the narcissistic personality disorder that drove Chapman and John Hinkley, who would try to shoot President Reagan just 3 months after Lennon's death.
The cult of celebrity agitates these individuals to the point that they feel they must act on their sick and twisted beliefs.
In the case of Chapman, who has another parole hearing scheduled for next year, I doubt very much that his illness-which is one of the most difficult pysch disorders to treat or "cure"-has abated, no matter what he now claims.
I fear there are many more MDC's and Hinkley's running around out there on the loose.
Actually, it is amazing to me that more murderous incidents don't take place even with the heightened security awareness evident around stars since John's murder.
But then again, we were lucky not to have lost George Harrison a year before we did, at the hands at yet another "crazed" fan.
So if one can declare any positive thing from such a horrible act as Lennon's murder, it would be that maybe, just maybe, we have prevented other similar tragedy's with our increased vigilance.
But it was such a high price to pay.
John Lennon, RIP.
Monday, December 08, 2003
Beatle Bits #73
In November of 1980, I was volunteering at the local university's campus radio station.
Around the middle of the month, the big news was the upcoming release of John Lennon's first album in 5 years, to be entitled Double Fantasy.
I can't even recall how I got on to it, but the name of David Peel came up.
Peel, a somewhat crazed lower east side of New York City, Bohemian, half-crazed hippie/yippy who had actually recorded several albums, including the infamous. "The Pope Smokes Dope," was well into the process of promoting his latest, "John Lennon For President," on Orange Peel Records.
But what made Peel interesting to me was that he had played with the Elephant's Memory band, that John had hooked up with shortly after he began living in New York City in 1971.
Somehow, I got hold of Peel via phone from NYC-I think he may have been in a phone booth- and did my very first radio phone interview.
Peel made a lot of claims-among them that Lennon had actually "produced" his latest album-but it is a rather at the time throw away statement he made that I will never forget.
Peel was reflecting on the fact that Lennon, unlike other fabled performers who had faded away and fell upon hard economic times or poor health, was making a big successful splash that was the talk of the town if not many parts of the world.
"John Lennon is still alive and still with us and still making music," I recall Peel saying towards the end of the interview. "He's alive and in good shape," said Peel emphatically.
Peel vowed to come to Canada to "rally" for the Beatles to get back together, and we put the interview together with the new single, Starting Over and other Lennon solo album tracks, and ran it as a 1 hour special several times during the last week of November 1980.
I remember the buzz that went through the station when Peel's signed copy of John Lennon For President arrived through the mail.
Just about a week later as I sat at home watching Monday Night Football at about 11pm, Howard Cosell broke the news that John Lennon had been shot and killed.
All I could think of at that moment was David Peel's hopeful thoughts for John Lennon, and how an entire era had just crashed down upon our heads.
Around the middle of the month, the big news was the upcoming release of John Lennon's first album in 5 years, to be entitled Double Fantasy.
I can't even recall how I got on to it, but the name of David Peel came up.
Peel, a somewhat crazed lower east side of New York City, Bohemian, half-crazed hippie/yippy who had actually recorded several albums, including the infamous. "The Pope Smokes Dope," was well into the process of promoting his latest, "John Lennon For President," on Orange Peel Records.
But what made Peel interesting to me was that he had played with the Elephant's Memory band, that John had hooked up with shortly after he began living in New York City in 1971.
Somehow, I got hold of Peel via phone from NYC-I think he may have been in a phone booth- and did my very first radio phone interview.
Peel made a lot of claims-among them that Lennon had actually "produced" his latest album-but it is a rather at the time throw away statement he made that I will never forget.
Peel was reflecting on the fact that Lennon, unlike other fabled performers who had faded away and fell upon hard economic times or poor health, was making a big successful splash that was the talk of the town if not many parts of the world.
"John Lennon is still alive and still with us and still making music," I recall Peel saying towards the end of the interview. "He's alive and in good shape," said Peel emphatically.
Peel vowed to come to Canada to "rally" for the Beatles to get back together, and we put the interview together with the new single, Starting Over and other Lennon solo album tracks, and ran it as a 1 hour special several times during the last week of November 1980.
I remember the buzz that went through the station when Peel's signed copy of John Lennon For President arrived through the mail.
Just about a week later as I sat at home watching Monday Night Football at about 11pm, Howard Cosell broke the news that John Lennon had been shot and killed.
All I could think of at that moment was David Peel's hopeful thoughts for John Lennon, and how an entire era had just crashed down upon our heads.
Sunday, December 07, 2003
Beatle Bits #72
Richard, a regular reader of your BBs from the great state of California, has been nice enough to send me some of those grey market mono Beatle CDs that you sometimes read about on the Internet.
Although I already had the coveted Sgt. Pepper and White Album in their mono configurations-but in low fi vinyl to cassette to CD form- I was keen to hear some of the new fangled transfers that are being peddled at present.
Without listing brand names, I will tell you that I found the Japanese red vinyl mono Sgt. P to be quite superior to the regular EMI mono issue.
Although both mono's have the most obvious differences to the stereo issues-a speeded up She's Leaving Home and a more messy Sgt. Pepper's Reprise-the Japanese mono appears to have been mastered better and is of a more fuller sound, usually asssociated with a modern recording.
However, when one compares the Japaneses mono to any Sgt. P stereo issue, it is amazing how many subtle but noticable differences there are in the two mixes.
Some are more tonal and balance oriented than strictly "different", but others are quite noticable.
I found that basically every song on the mono issue is "different" to the stereo counterpart,-in this case MFSL UHQR-with the Japanese isssue being the gold standard for discerning those differences.
But if you think about how these 1966-67 4 track tapes were originally mixed it's not hard to see-and hear- what happened.
The Fabs preferred mono at the time, so that was the mix that was worked on first and given the most consideration. It has been reported previously that few of the Beatles even bothered to show up for the stereo mixes, which were done later by George Martin, or even Abbey Road Studio engineers.
So, the stereo mix would be the one that would be added to and subtracted from and yes, even experimented on, because it was considered to be a lark by the Beatles, and after all, the "best" one was already in the can.
So I'm not sure I agree with those-including George Harrison-who claimed that the mono Sgt. P was the only way to hear the album.
Rather, I think both editions are excellent, but in fact the stereo version may in fact be the more polished edition, albeit the lesser in lore.
Believe it or not, some rather sloppy edits on the mono Sgt. P were cleaned up for the stereo version.
However, I will caveat my assessment of the mono vs. stereo debate until we have a digital source that is mastered straight from the master tapes with all the advantages of state of the art equalization and studio wizardry that Apple now employs.
Such an eventuality is sure to yeild even more aural delights and differences for us to discuss.
In a future Bits, the White Album: mono vs. stereo.
Although I already had the coveted Sgt. Pepper and White Album in their mono configurations-but in low fi vinyl to cassette to CD form- I was keen to hear some of the new fangled transfers that are being peddled at present.
Without listing brand names, I will tell you that I found the Japanese red vinyl mono Sgt. P to be quite superior to the regular EMI mono issue.
Although both mono's have the most obvious differences to the stereo issues-a speeded up She's Leaving Home and a more messy Sgt. Pepper's Reprise-the Japanese mono appears to have been mastered better and is of a more fuller sound, usually asssociated with a modern recording.
However, when one compares the Japaneses mono to any Sgt. P stereo issue, it is amazing how many subtle but noticable differences there are in the two mixes.
Some are more tonal and balance oriented than strictly "different", but others are quite noticable.
I found that basically every song on the mono issue is "different" to the stereo counterpart,-in this case MFSL UHQR-with the Japanese isssue being the gold standard for discerning those differences.
But if you think about how these 1966-67 4 track tapes were originally mixed it's not hard to see-and hear- what happened.
The Fabs preferred mono at the time, so that was the mix that was worked on first and given the most consideration. It has been reported previously that few of the Beatles even bothered to show up for the stereo mixes, which were done later by George Martin, or even Abbey Road Studio engineers.
So, the stereo mix would be the one that would be added to and subtracted from and yes, even experimented on, because it was considered to be a lark by the Beatles, and after all, the "best" one was already in the can.
So I'm not sure I agree with those-including George Harrison-who claimed that the mono Sgt. P was the only way to hear the album.
Rather, I think both editions are excellent, but in fact the stereo version may in fact be the more polished edition, albeit the lesser in lore.
Believe it or not, some rather sloppy edits on the mono Sgt. P were cleaned up for the stereo version.
However, I will caveat my assessment of the mono vs. stereo debate until we have a digital source that is mastered straight from the master tapes with all the advantages of state of the art equalization and studio wizardry that Apple now employs.
Such an eventuality is sure to yeild even more aural delights and differences for us to discuss.
In a future Bits, the White Album: mono vs. stereo.
Saturday, December 06, 2003
Beatle Bits #71
In a previous Bits, I gave what I consider to be a fair and open minded look at what was billed as "the failed 1974 reunion tape."
You may have heard or read about a tape being in existence from a long forgotten or even secret Beatles session that was quietly shelved due to bickering by the Beatles, and then kept out of the public domain for almost 30 years.
And although everyone I consulted said that there was nothing to it or at least they had never heard of it- I wanted to also at least give those promoting it a shot at telling their story. Even if it was in the win a million bucks in the lottery territory.
Well, I can tell you all now that as far as I'm considered this thing is done like diner;stick a fork in it. And put out the trash while yer at it.
It appears to have all been a waste of time and megabytes.
To recap:
First, I received a picture of a old beat up Ampex plastic tape box, which could have been anything, but as far as I could see sure said nothing about the Beatles.
Then, I am told that oops!, sorry, it was not a tape from a 1974 session, but rather from 1976.
As many readers had pointed out, 1974 was problematic for such a reunion, and perhaps that forced a hasty revision.
Next, after being supplied with a song list that listed 5 very amateurish titles, a revised song list with a title that was not on the first list appeared, for a total of 6 songs.
So I e-mailed my concerns and questions to the individual who now admits that he is involved to sell a) a tape that someone says could be the Beatles from a session that could have been in 1974 or 1976 and b) from a tape that has been advertised as being bulk erased and may or may not contain "trace data," and I heard nothing back.
I would venture that even the guy peddling the Chapman album would not touch this tape with a 10 ft. pole.
And some of the things that have been said about the whole sad affair on the various Beatle Internet forums, well, I won't make the purveyors of this failed attempt look any worse than they do right now.
I'm even sort of kicking myself for simply giving this thing any kind of legitimacy at all, but then again in this business, well, you never really know, so my attitude when something way out comes along is why the hell not?
Until it slaps me in the face.
Ouch!
You may have heard or read about a tape being in existence from a long forgotten or even secret Beatles session that was quietly shelved due to bickering by the Beatles, and then kept out of the public domain for almost 30 years.
And although everyone I consulted said that there was nothing to it or at least they had never heard of it- I wanted to also at least give those promoting it a shot at telling their story. Even if it was in the win a million bucks in the lottery territory.
Well, I can tell you all now that as far as I'm considered this thing is done like diner;stick a fork in it. And put out the trash while yer at it.
It appears to have all been a waste of time and megabytes.
To recap:
First, I received a picture of a old beat up Ampex plastic tape box, which could have been anything, but as far as I could see sure said nothing about the Beatles.
Then, I am told that oops!, sorry, it was not a tape from a 1974 session, but rather from 1976.
As many readers had pointed out, 1974 was problematic for such a reunion, and perhaps that forced a hasty revision.
Next, after being supplied with a song list that listed 5 very amateurish titles, a revised song list with a title that was not on the first list appeared, for a total of 6 songs.
So I e-mailed my concerns and questions to the individual who now admits that he is involved to sell a) a tape that someone says could be the Beatles from a session that could have been in 1974 or 1976 and b) from a tape that has been advertised as being bulk erased and may or may not contain "trace data," and I heard nothing back.
I would venture that even the guy peddling the Chapman album would not touch this tape with a 10 ft. pole.
And some of the things that have been said about the whole sad affair on the various Beatle Internet forums, well, I won't make the purveyors of this failed attempt look any worse than they do right now.
I'm even sort of kicking myself for simply giving this thing any kind of legitimacy at all, but then again in this business, well, you never really know, so my attitude when something way out comes along is why the hell not?
Until it slaps me in the face.
Ouch!
Friday, December 05, 2003
Beatle Bits #70
Hey! The number 7 got me thinking about odds and all things lucky.
So I figured I would do a little Beatle handicapping on the odds of what we will or may see in the way of Fab Four releases in 2004.
The following odds are intended for amusement and discussion and arguing purposes only.
At 2-1:We will finally get Let it Be on DVD
At 4-1: We will get a 40th anniversary release of Live at the Hollywood Bowl.
At 3-1: We will get a partial back catalogue remastering in high end audio.
At 5-1: We will get a complete back catalogue remastering before X-Mas.
At 10-1: We will get a new edition of Help! on DVD.
As you can tell from the above odds, I give a DVD LIB the most likely of all Beatle releases in 2004. Although in the weird and wonderful wacky world of Apple/EMI, nothing is a sure thing and sometimes no sense makes same, this is the surest thing to a sure thing we've got going. As Robert Blake used to say before he was charged with murder:take dis one to da bank, brother.
At 4-1, I see the Hollywood Bowl as-if you will excuse the pun-the wild card of future Beatle releases. This one would appear to be a no-brainer in 2004, what with it being the 40th birthday of Beatlmania, and would most likely require the least effort from Apple/EMI.
But once again....see above when it comes to making sense.
OK, at 3-1 and 5-1, things get dicey. I suspect that there are several factors driving the full catalogue re-releases with format, and content being two of them, but the situation with Michael Jackson and the question of publishing rights is also huge. And I fear that it may take a sale by Jackson, or a merger of EMI with Sony or another record company to get these things out in our lifetime.
The long shot of course, is Help! If the back catalogue is a non starter and the other contenders for release fall through, then Help! may be a fall back position for X-Mas product 2004.
So there you have it. All you need is cash.
And luck be a lady, tonight.
So I figured I would do a little Beatle handicapping on the odds of what we will or may see in the way of Fab Four releases in 2004.
The following odds are intended for amusement and discussion and arguing purposes only.
At 2-1:We will finally get Let it Be on DVD
At 4-1: We will get a 40th anniversary release of Live at the Hollywood Bowl.
At 3-1: We will get a partial back catalogue remastering in high end audio.
At 5-1: We will get a complete back catalogue remastering before X-Mas.
At 10-1: We will get a new edition of Help! on DVD.
As you can tell from the above odds, I give a DVD LIB the most likely of all Beatle releases in 2004. Although in the weird and wonderful wacky world of Apple/EMI, nothing is a sure thing and sometimes no sense makes same, this is the surest thing to a sure thing we've got going. As Robert Blake used to say before he was charged with murder:take dis one to da bank, brother.
At 4-1, I see the Hollywood Bowl as-if you will excuse the pun-the wild card of future Beatle releases. This one would appear to be a no-brainer in 2004, what with it being the 40th birthday of Beatlmania, and would most likely require the least effort from Apple/EMI.
But once again....see above when it comes to making sense.
OK, at 3-1 and 5-1, things get dicey. I suspect that there are several factors driving the full catalogue re-releases with format, and content being two of them, but the situation with Michael Jackson and the question of publishing rights is also huge. And I fear that it may take a sale by Jackson, or a merger of EMI with Sony or another record company to get these things out in our lifetime.
The long shot of course, is Help! If the back catalogue is a non starter and the other contenders for release fall through, then Help! may be a fall back position for X-Mas product 2004.
So there you have it. All you need is cash.
And luck be a lady, tonight.
Thursday, December 04, 2003
Beatle Bits #69
Can it be possible that 25 years have passed since the pre-Fab Four stormed North America?
Yes indeedy, it has been a quarter century since the Rutles-Dirk, Stig, Nasty and Barry-stole our hearts and got our toes a-tapping with their catchy melodies and every thing else they did.
To this day, I sometimes blur the line between Rutles and Beatles, such was the symmetry between the real and faux Fab Fours.
I guess some people didn't real "get" the concept of the Rutles, but for those of us who did, it was-and remains-an incredibly hilarious trip.
Some of the droll quips in the Rutles: All You Need Is Cash were so memorable it seems unfair to just single out a few. But I will.
I really like the line about the first Rutles record-what else, Meet The Rutles- being a "millstone in pop history" and the fact that "their first album took 20 minutes to record;their second took even longer," are all-timers.
Plus who can forget, "stunned, very stunned," and "Nasty blew it up" (Rutle Corps)
So when I interviewed Rutle mastermind Eric Idle in 2000, and he told me that he was at that very time-yes at that very time-going through long lost footage of the fabulous Rutles for a sequel to be called Can't Buy Me Lunch, I was, high, as if on tea.
But alas, CBML was pulled from general theatrical release after a very limited showing on the west coast earlier this year, and now I guess we will have to survive until the video appears.
It filled me with thoughts of grief, of Australia.
Maybe it's true you can't go home again, but for me, seeing any unseen footage from the go-kart of fame that the Rutles ran would have been like loving life, or a cheese and onion Yellow Submarine Sandwich.
Some may have forgotten that when Nasty appeared on Saturday Night Live in 1978 playing C&O, some people actually thought it was John Lennon making some sort of split second surprise cameo.
And remember the original beautiful gatefold album TR: AYNIC with the booklet explaining the phenom that was the Rutles?
It was so painful to see it several years later in the cut-out delete bin for $1.99.
I lost my original album, and I had to search for quite a while during the mid 80s to find a copy in good shape.
Years later we would get a CD with a few extras, and years later still until we got a great DVD with some very funny outtakes.
In any event, I plan on getting wet for peace, and will recite the I Ching every 20 minutes until the video release of Can't Buy Me Lunch.
Do I have to spell it out?
Yes indeedy, it has been a quarter century since the Rutles-Dirk, Stig, Nasty and Barry-stole our hearts and got our toes a-tapping with their catchy melodies and every thing else they did.
To this day, I sometimes blur the line between Rutles and Beatles, such was the symmetry between the real and faux Fab Fours.
I guess some people didn't real "get" the concept of the Rutles, but for those of us who did, it was-and remains-an incredibly hilarious trip.
Some of the droll quips in the Rutles: All You Need Is Cash were so memorable it seems unfair to just single out a few. But I will.
I really like the line about the first Rutles record-what else, Meet The Rutles- being a "millstone in pop history" and the fact that "their first album took 20 minutes to record;their second took even longer," are all-timers.
Plus who can forget, "stunned, very stunned," and "Nasty blew it up" (Rutle Corps)
So when I interviewed Rutle mastermind Eric Idle in 2000, and he told me that he was at that very time-yes at that very time-going through long lost footage of the fabulous Rutles for a sequel to be called Can't Buy Me Lunch, I was, high, as if on tea.
But alas, CBML was pulled from general theatrical release after a very limited showing on the west coast earlier this year, and now I guess we will have to survive until the video appears.
It filled me with thoughts of grief, of Australia.
Maybe it's true you can't go home again, but for me, seeing any unseen footage from the go-kart of fame that the Rutles ran would have been like loving life, or a cheese and onion Yellow Submarine Sandwich.
Some may have forgotten that when Nasty appeared on Saturday Night Live in 1978 playing C&O, some people actually thought it was John Lennon making some sort of split second surprise cameo.
And remember the original beautiful gatefold album TR: AYNIC with the booklet explaining the phenom that was the Rutles?
It was so painful to see it several years later in the cut-out delete bin for $1.99.
I lost my original album, and I had to search for quite a while during the mid 80s to find a copy in good shape.
Years later we would get a CD with a few extras, and years later still until we got a great DVD with some very funny outtakes.
In any event, I plan on getting wet for peace, and will recite the I Ching every 20 minutes until the video release of Can't Buy Me Lunch.
Do I have to spell it out?
Wednesday, December 03, 2003
Beatle Bits #68
Yesterday's Bits that pointed out that it was sheer madness for George Harrison's All Things Must Pass got stuck down at 437 in the Rolling Stone magazine Top 500 albums of all time also got me thinking about the upcoming reissue of some of George's back catalogue.
As AbbeyRd reported yesterday, it looks like early in the new year we will be getting quite a few Harrison Dark Horse LP reissues from the late 70s and early 80s, plus Cloud Nine and Live in Japan.
The current information available is that the reissues will all contain bonus tracks, except for Live in Japan.
And that is too bad, because LIJ could have been so much more.
If you recall, the tour that George took to the far east in 1990 included Eric Clapton as a lead guitar. Not a bad addition to any band, I'd say.
But then apparently, something occurred which resulted in Clapton not performing any of his own tunes on LIJ.
However, audience tapes that were circulating at the time showcased some blistering Clapton sets, as well as Eric wailing on Harrison tunes as well.
Therefore, it is unfortunate that in an age when reissues are generally forced to contain something "extra" as a selling point, the only difference we'll hear is the use of the SACD hybrid format for the double disc set.
Of course the real, big Harrison reissue news will come when Concert for Bangla Desh, Living in the Material World, Dark Horse, and Extra Texture finally get the deluxe treatment.
Personally, I can't wait to hear an expanded LITMW with improved sound and alternates and outtakes and even the B side Miss O'Dell.
This was a lush sounding record, and I'm sure there is loads of unheard material from multiple takes and overdubs that fans would love to hear.
And as I mentioned in a previous Bits, it would be nice to have some of the material from the 1974 Dark Horse Tour included in any reissue of the LP Dark Horse, or even a stand alone concert album.
I have to admit to you that the first batch of Harrison reissues-save for CN and LIJ-are not exactly my faves, but to each his or her own, and I'm sure that dedicated fans of the Quiet One will be happy to have any new George in 2004.
And for the real dreamers out there, dream a little dream about all the material that never got a legit release from the multiple Travelling Willbury's sessions.
Now that, would make a great box set for next Christmas!
As AbbeyRd reported yesterday, it looks like early in the new year we will be getting quite a few Harrison Dark Horse LP reissues from the late 70s and early 80s, plus Cloud Nine and Live in Japan.
The current information available is that the reissues will all contain bonus tracks, except for Live in Japan.
And that is too bad, because LIJ could have been so much more.
If you recall, the tour that George took to the far east in 1990 included Eric Clapton as a lead guitar. Not a bad addition to any band, I'd say.
But then apparently, something occurred which resulted in Clapton not performing any of his own tunes on LIJ.
However, audience tapes that were circulating at the time showcased some blistering Clapton sets, as well as Eric wailing on Harrison tunes as well.
Therefore, it is unfortunate that in an age when reissues are generally forced to contain something "extra" as a selling point, the only difference we'll hear is the use of the SACD hybrid format for the double disc set.
Of course the real, big Harrison reissue news will come when Concert for Bangla Desh, Living in the Material World, Dark Horse, and Extra Texture finally get the deluxe treatment.
Personally, I can't wait to hear an expanded LITMW with improved sound and alternates and outtakes and even the B side Miss O'Dell.
This was a lush sounding record, and I'm sure there is loads of unheard material from multiple takes and overdubs that fans would love to hear.
And as I mentioned in a previous Bits, it would be nice to have some of the material from the 1974 Dark Horse Tour included in any reissue of the LP Dark Horse, or even a stand alone concert album.
I have to admit to you that the first batch of Harrison reissues-save for CN and LIJ-are not exactly my faves, but to each his or her own, and I'm sure that dedicated fans of the Quiet One will be happy to have any new George in 2004.
And for the real dreamers out there, dream a little dream about all the material that never got a legit release from the multiple Travelling Willbury's sessions.
Now that, would make a great box set for next Christmas!
Tuesday, December 02, 2003
Beatle Bits #67
Wait 'till all the Macca Madhatters peruse the new Rolling Stone magazine Top 500 Albums of all time issue.
I'll bet their collective keyboard's will be hyper tapping out missives to RS editors who dared to list just one Paul McCartney/Wings album-Band on the Run at 418-in their editorial polled results.
Meanwhile, John Lennon grabs 2 positions in the top 100, with Plastic Ono Band at 22, and Imagine at 76.
And although I like to hold my mental health a little closer to the thinking heart than the roiling MMs, I can't say if I don't understand their assured grievance with this poll.
I mean, BOTR was-and still is-one hell of a pop album, and when you tally up some of the drivel that rates ahead of it, a rank of 418 is just plain stupid, period.
BOTR was a monster selling album and should have definitely been in the top 100.
Conversely, although I think POB is a near great album, one might argue that a rank of 22 is a tad too high, and that for damn sure it is not almost 400 places superior to BOTR.
And Imagine may be rated too low at 76. It is afterall, the record and album that is most associated with John Lennon.
But at least Lennon got 2 albums up on the list.
Meanwhile McCartney, whose solo output far surpasses Lennon's in number can place just one LP out of 500.
Wings Over America should have been a lock on this RS list somewhere at least no worse than 350, and even Red Rose Speedway could have snuck in just under 500.
But perhaps the people who have right to be the most pissed off, are the fans of George Harrison.
If you can believe it, George's tour de force and multi million selling All Things Must Pass came in at 437! What a crock of sheit!
ATMP was the top selling solo Beatle album of all time, and should have placed no lower than 30. Even an argument could be made for Living in the Material World to sneak in just under 500.
And Ringo Starr, who sold so many million records with Ringo in 1973? Didn't even make the cut.
Of course these lists always are controversial and the voters and reviewers are damn if they do and damn if they don't, but this latest one is so off base when it comes to solo Beatles rankings that one would suspect that like the Rutles, the voters, they have had tea.
I'll bet their collective keyboard's will be hyper tapping out missives to RS editors who dared to list just one Paul McCartney/Wings album-Band on the Run at 418-in their editorial polled results.
Meanwhile, John Lennon grabs 2 positions in the top 100, with Plastic Ono Band at 22, and Imagine at 76.
And although I like to hold my mental health a little closer to the thinking heart than the roiling MMs, I can't say if I don't understand their assured grievance with this poll.
I mean, BOTR was-and still is-one hell of a pop album, and when you tally up some of the drivel that rates ahead of it, a rank of 418 is just plain stupid, period.
BOTR was a monster selling album and should have definitely been in the top 100.
Conversely, although I think POB is a near great album, one might argue that a rank of 22 is a tad too high, and that for damn sure it is not almost 400 places superior to BOTR.
And Imagine may be rated too low at 76. It is afterall, the record and album that is most associated with John Lennon.
But at least Lennon got 2 albums up on the list.
Meanwhile McCartney, whose solo output far surpasses Lennon's in number can place just one LP out of 500.
Wings Over America should have been a lock on this RS list somewhere at least no worse than 350, and even Red Rose Speedway could have snuck in just under 500.
But perhaps the people who have right to be the most pissed off, are the fans of George Harrison.
If you can believe it, George's tour de force and multi million selling All Things Must Pass came in at 437! What a crock of sheit!
ATMP was the top selling solo Beatle album of all time, and should have placed no lower than 30. Even an argument could be made for Living in the Material World to sneak in just under 500.
And Ringo Starr, who sold so many million records with Ringo in 1973? Didn't even make the cut.
Of course these lists always are controversial and the voters and reviewers are damn if they do and damn if they don't, but this latest one is so off base when it comes to solo Beatles rankings that one would suspect that like the Rutles, the voters, they have had tea.
Monday, December 01, 2003
Beatle Bits #66
What would you say if I told you there had been a secret Beatles reunion recording session nearly 30 years ago that produced 5 new songs that were produced by George Martin, and that Martin had given his permission to disclose the tape?
Would you say this is bollocks/rubbish like the rumoured 1999 Yellow Sub concert or this is "Paul is dead" lunacy country? (Both stoires made national news at the time.) Or would you say that such a far out notion could somehow against all odds be possible, or even true?
Well, that is what one apparently sincere Beatles fan/film producer/marketer is claiming, first posting the tale on an Internet Beatle forum earlier today, under the heading of "The 1974 Failed Reunion Master Tape."
In an exchange of e-mails today, the fan told me that the tape had been obtained by a friend of his in an auction of the original studio, which is no longer in existence.
According to the fan, the sessions broke down "in part to Yoko's constant presence," and that the whole thing was called off, with the tape being "bulk erased."
Now the term bulk erased as I understand it pertains to an electro magnetic device that a audio tape is placed over, which erases the content of the entire tape, hence the term "bulk erased."
However, according to the fan, the "tape still contains trace data as all bulk erased tapes do," and so the music should be able to be extracted using new audio techniques.
I guess "should" is the operative word.
According to the fan, the songs are as follows:
1/ Back Again
2/ Happy Feelin'
3/ Little Girl
4/ People of the Third World
5/ Rockin' Once Again
The fan claims that there is an actual tape box with logo and the "names of the Fab Four written on the spine," although no mention was made as to the composers of each tune.
Although I once saw an interview John Lennon gave to Elliot Mintz in 1974 whilst strolling on the beach at Malibu in which John coyly hints at a reunion, it is common knowledge that during 1974, Lennon was apart from Yoko, and in fact in the midst of his "lost weekend" that lasted 18 months.
Hard to figure then how she could have been a factor in scuttling any sessions.
Plus, not one single Beatle "expert" that I consulted has ever heard anything about such a tape or session dating to 1974.
One regular contributor to the Internet forum on which the story was first placed described the claimed exsistence of a '74 reunion tape as an "April Fool's joke."
Another knowledgeable Beatle chronicler commented that the titles of the 5 songs listed sounded amateurish, and I agree.
However, that does not mean the tape story is categorically false, but rather would seem to be extremely farfetched.
In addition, the timing of the release of this supposed reunion tape is suspicious, coming on the heels of the AP story on the auction of the Mark Chapman album, and the looming anniversary of John's murder. It's a prime and fallow marketing pasture for all things Beatle.
Somehow, I seem to detect a faint odour of cold hard cash floating around this like visions of sugar plum fairies do at Christmas and in Strawberry Fields for good little boys and girls snug in their beds, or even outa their heads.
Finally, I find it almost impossible to believe, that such an event as a Beatles reunion -just 4 years aft of a very public and messy divorce-could be kept secret at the time and all these years since.
But if there's even a kernel of truth in this affair, we'll find out sooner now, than later.
Last word to fan/film producer/marketer who is the bringer of this news:
"I know you want to make sure you are not talking to a goofball. It's a real interesting story," he said.
"Terry, I won't waste your time," said the fan, who also provided his phone number and business references.
Would you say this is bollocks/rubbish like the rumoured 1999 Yellow Sub concert or this is "Paul is dead" lunacy country? (Both stoires made national news at the time.) Or would you say that such a far out notion could somehow against all odds be possible, or even true?
Well, that is what one apparently sincere Beatles fan/film producer/marketer is claiming, first posting the tale on an Internet Beatle forum earlier today, under the heading of "The 1974 Failed Reunion Master Tape."
In an exchange of e-mails today, the fan told me that the tape had been obtained by a friend of his in an auction of the original studio, which is no longer in existence.
According to the fan, the sessions broke down "in part to Yoko's constant presence," and that the whole thing was called off, with the tape being "bulk erased."
Now the term bulk erased as I understand it pertains to an electro magnetic device that a audio tape is placed over, which erases the content of the entire tape, hence the term "bulk erased."
However, according to the fan, the "tape still contains trace data as all bulk erased tapes do," and so the music should be able to be extracted using new audio techniques.
I guess "should" is the operative word.
According to the fan, the songs are as follows:
1/ Back Again
2/ Happy Feelin'
3/ Little Girl
4/ People of the Third World
5/ Rockin' Once Again
The fan claims that there is an actual tape box with logo and the "names of the Fab Four written on the spine," although no mention was made as to the composers of each tune.
Although I once saw an interview John Lennon gave to Elliot Mintz in 1974 whilst strolling on the beach at Malibu in which John coyly hints at a reunion, it is common knowledge that during 1974, Lennon was apart from Yoko, and in fact in the midst of his "lost weekend" that lasted 18 months.
Hard to figure then how she could have been a factor in scuttling any sessions.
Plus, not one single Beatle "expert" that I consulted has ever heard anything about such a tape or session dating to 1974.
One regular contributor to the Internet forum on which the story was first placed described the claimed exsistence of a '74 reunion tape as an "April Fool's joke."
Another knowledgeable Beatle chronicler commented that the titles of the 5 songs listed sounded amateurish, and I agree.
However, that does not mean the tape story is categorically false, but rather would seem to be extremely farfetched.
In addition, the timing of the release of this supposed reunion tape is suspicious, coming on the heels of the AP story on the auction of the Mark Chapman album, and the looming anniversary of John's murder. It's a prime and fallow marketing pasture for all things Beatle.
Somehow, I seem to detect a faint odour of cold hard cash floating around this like visions of sugar plum fairies do at Christmas and in Strawberry Fields for good little boys and girls snug in their beds, or even outa their heads.
Finally, I find it almost impossible to believe, that such an event as a Beatles reunion -just 4 years aft of a very public and messy divorce-could be kept secret at the time and all these years since.
But if there's even a kernel of truth in this affair, we'll find out sooner now, than later.
Last word to fan/film producer/marketer who is the bringer of this news:
"I know you want to make sure you are not talking to a goofball. It's a real interesting story," he said.
"Terry, I won't waste your time," said the fan, who also provided his phone number and business references.
