I have had it up to here waiting for the Beatles catalogue to be remastered

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
What's the hold up? Does anybody have any information?

fizzcaraldo (Justin M), Wednesday, 7 September 2005 22:07 (sixteen years ago) link

up to where?

jed_ (jed), Wednesday, 7 September 2005 22:11 (sixteen years ago) link

I still listen to old LPs. Are the currently in print CD versions that horrible (and, if so, why not just buy them on vinyl)?

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Wednesday, 7 September 2005 22:12 (sixteen years ago) link

it's paul's fault. bless him.

but yeah you're right it takes the fckng p-ss doesn't it?

latest word is that magical mystery tour is coming out on dvd with all sorts of extra stuff. as if the actual movie isn't like 1 big 'extra' already.


piscesboy, Wednesday, 7 September 2005 22:13 (sixteen years ago) link

"it's paul's fault"

What isn't, really?

OK, why is it Paul's fault?

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Wednesday, 7 September 2005 22:18 (sixteen years ago) link

well i mean it must be paul/ EMI's dithering and arsing around that's to blame, the other fabs are either
a) dead or b) couldnt *really* care less.

maybe it's a question of who's up to the job, george martin sure as heck isn't. god don't let them get ELO=guy in again.

meanwhile, this ere beatles 10-dvd anthology unofficial bootleg edition can be yours for $150 :

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Original-BEATLES-Anthology-Directors-Cut-Real-10-DVDs_W0QQitemZ6430061859QQcategoryZ617QQssPageNameZWD2VQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

must say i'm tempted

piscesboy, Wednesday, 7 September 2005 23:00 (sixteen years ago) link

Well, there was that first-five-American-Beatles-albums-before-the-band-demanded-UK-US-consistency-in-the-tracklistings box set which was some sort of start...although the purist in me rather just have proper remasters/issues of the original British albums/track listings w/ the surrounding singles as bonus tracks.

That said, Macca, Ono, the Harrison family, and Da Ringosta can take their time settling this. I plan to finally digitize and sell off the CDs while I can get 'em for at least $4+ each back.

donut Get Behind Me Carbon Dioxide (donut), Wednesday, 7 September 2005 23:15 (sixteen years ago) link

seven months pass...
Looks like it's coming:

http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,70658-0.html?tw=rss.index

Brakhage (brakhage), Thursday, 13 April 2006 17:01 (fifteen years ago) link

Vague but sort of promising, I guess. The catalog does need CD remastering, badly, as the in-print CDs (except Let It Be Naked, and maybe that Yellow Submarine "songtrack" from a few years ago?) are all from that late-80s batch of early-generation CDs that gave CDs such a bad name. Mind you, I do think it's a wasted opportunity if they don't take the chance to delete Past Masters and Anthology, and just put all the singles and bonus stuff on second discs packed with the remasters...

Doctor Casino (Doctor Casino), Thursday, 13 April 2006 18:10 (fifteen years ago) link

"I think it would be wrong to offer downloads of the old masters when I am making new masters," he said in a written statement submitted to the High Court in London earlier this month.

But it's not wrong to continue to sell them on cd?

Agree re Past Masters/Anthology but they're such cash cows that they're not going to do it.

Billy Dods (Billy Dods), Thursday, 13 April 2006 18:26 (fifteen years ago) link

god remember the whole "anthology" phenomenon? those were awful.

amateurist0, Thursday, 13 April 2006 18:28 (fifteen years ago) link

I like the Past Masters CDs. Don't like the idea of Beatle albums being treated as mere collections of electronic data stuffed onto a compact disc. The problem, of course, is that CDs are too expensive. (Solution: buy old LPs.)

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 13 April 2006 18:31 (fifteen years ago) link

I kind of like the anthologies sets, too, especially the first one.

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 13 April 2006 18:31 (fifteen years ago) link

Yeah, the anthologies are great. Second one for me, though.

everything, Thursday, 13 April 2006 18:34 (fifteen years ago) link

A good thing about the "anthologies" is they are a good depository for the alternate mixes/takes etc., which--let's be realistic here--most people really don't want to hear (or have piggy-backed onto pricey new editions).

Chairman Doinel (Charles McCain), Thursday, 13 April 2006 18:42 (fifteen years ago) link

George isn't around to veto the inclusion of 'Carnival of Light' this time round.

Bob Six (bobbysix), Thursday, 13 April 2006 18:45 (fifteen years ago) link

there is no reason to put the singles and alternate takes on the albums. if they just follow the capitol box model and do mono and stereo mixes of the albums (with better packaging of course) that will suffice.

kyle (akmonday), Thursday, 13 April 2006 18:48 (fifteen years ago) link

I vote for Badmotorscooter.

QuantumNoise (Justin Farrar), Thursday, 13 April 2006 19:36 (fifteen years ago) link

How in the hell...Am I wasted?

Ah yes, the Beatles. I say buy the albums.

QuantumNoise (Justin Farrar), Thursday, 13 April 2006 19:37 (fifteen years ago) link

The Past Masters comps on their own are fine - I think I'd rather listen to the first one than anything up to Revolver at least. If they are to re-issue the lot, The White Album is going to need a box set all to itself.

Lotta Continua (Damian), Thursday, 13 April 2006 20:09 (fifteen years ago) link

I'm sure Paul will get it out all again eventually so he can ramp the price up to another ridiculous extreme. And turn himself up in the remastering process.

It would be nice if they released the red and blue anthologies so that they were in modern slimline 2CD cases rather than the FUCKING MASSIVE and HORRIBLE ones that they are in now.

Raw Patrick (Raw Patrick), Thursday, 13 April 2006 21:53 (fifteen years ago) link

And in the case of the Red album, compiled on to a single, less overpriced, CD - the total running time of the 2CD set is just over 60mins. The asking price of £20-£30 is a piss take.

Michael Lambert (Michael Lambert), Thursday, 13 April 2006 22:01 (fifteen years ago) link

which--let's be realistic here--most people really don't want to hear (or have piggy-backed onto pricey new editions)

Are the people not interested in paying for pricey new editions of things really the target market for remastered versions of CDs that are available in droves in used CD stores the world over?

Seriously, I don't see what's so much better (and less cash-cow-ish) about retaining Past Masters and Anthology. OK, so it's kind of cool to have all the singles in one place, but it also robs them of context AND presents a somewhat confusing picture for buyers, who can't figure out which album it is that has "I Want To Hold Your Hand" on it. The PM sets are also really oddly-balanced, anyway - not quite a greatest hits, not quite an odds-and-sods. The Anthologies are just plain obnoxious, especially the first one with all the talky-talky bits.

I guess I'm just coming from a perspective where, if they just remaster the CDs I'll take a pass because I have the LPs already. But if they sweeten the deal I just might think it over, at least for a couple, assuming they went ahead and added more outtake/live stuff. Granted, they would still be kind of weirdly-sequenced albums with one or two singles at the front followed by a bunch of obscurities.... okay, maybe keep Past Masters after all. But I REALLY think it makes more sense to get the unreleased and live material wedded on to the appropriate albums - if nothing else, it means getting MORE of it, right?

Doctor Casino (Doctor Casino), Thursday, 13 April 2006 22:13 (fifteen years ago) link

"turn himself up in the remastering process"

What is an example where he has ever done this?

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 13 April 2006 22:19 (fifteen years ago) link

Firstly, as any fule kno, Beatles CDs are not very common 2nd hand, except for the Anthologies and the BBC thing.

Secondly, Paul has little need to turn himself up anyway. He took a lot of care, recording his bass lines on a single track and spent ages getting the sound right. Why not? It's his friggin songs for fuxake!

everything, Thursday, 13 April 2006 22:24 (fifteen years ago) link

wow I had no idea the Anthologies were so hated. I only have the 2nd and 3rd ones and think they're fantastic - where else would I hear this stuff? Surely its the highest quality source for "What's the New Mary Jane" or "You Know My Name Look Up the Number" and a host of other rarities.

Shakey Mo Collier (Shakey Mo Collier), Thursday, 13 April 2006 22:27 (fifteen years ago) link

I don't understand it either. Maybe it's just too much Beatles for some people? I've only got a couple of tiny quibbles with them and it's usually just those times when it gets a bit self-indulgent, like those different version of the Fool On The Hill. Paul is obviously so proud of them but I just can't take it.

everything, Thursday, 13 April 2006 22:31 (fifteen years ago) link

ppl just like to complain about the beatles, i guess.

anthology 2 is the best, what with the stoned cracking-up version of and your bird can sing and the gorgeous demos of strawberry fields. 3 is good for the white album stuff, and 1 is probably the only time any americans (me included) will ever hear any morecambe and wise.

J.D. (Justyn Dillingham), Thursday, 13 April 2006 22:38 (fifteen years ago) link

"as any fule kno, Beatles CDs are not very common 2nd hand, except for the Anthologies and the BBC thing."

Well, they are getting slightly more plentiful. In fact, I got most of my collection used. But, then again, I've been lucky. The worst thing about used Beatle cds is that stores priced higher than average (i.e. in the US 10-12 dollars vs. 7-9). Shopping around helps, and the prices have leveled off (and no doubt will continue)

I will concur regarding the Anthologies and the BBC, but--to cite my earlier post--alot of the people who bought them probably realized that they didn't listen to them as much as the regular LPs.

Chairman Doinel (Charles McCain), Thursday, 13 April 2006 22:40 (fifteen years ago) link

The live stuff at the end of disc 1 and the beginning of disc 2 of Anthology 1 is really cool.

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Thursday, 13 April 2006 22:41 (fifteen years ago) link

it's paul's fault. bless him.

Neil Aspinall is probably the one to blame.

Anyway, seems like some good news is finally coming up.

Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Thursday, 13 April 2006 22:59 (fifteen years ago) link

Man, I'm not hating on any of the contents of the Anthologies (aside from, again, the talky stuff on Anth1) - I LOVE the music on those discs, the glimpses into the recording studio, etc. And when I was 16 me and my Beatle buddy developed a substantial secret language out of the miscellaneous bits of studio chatter. "Sugar plum fairy, sugar plum fairy..."

Doctor Casino (Doctor Casino), Thursday, 13 April 2006 23:03 (fifteen years ago) link

Vague but sort of promising, I guess. The catalog does need CD remastering, badly, as the in-print CDs (except Let It Be Naked, and maybe that Yellow Submarine "songtrack" from a few years ago?) are all from that late-80s batch of early-generation CDs that gave CDs such a bad name.

While I agree that they need remastering, I don't neccessarily agree with your version of what they sounded like. The first four, sure, but the rest, particularly from "Sgt. Pepper" onwards, used state of the art remastering technology at the time, and sounded really impressive back then.

Only this is 20 years ago and a lot has happened since then.

Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Thursday, 13 April 2006 23:08 (fifteen years ago) link

the Pepper cd sounds horrible against the vinyl version. The White Album stacks up ok but I got the 30th anniversary reissue not the original cd.

tremendoid (tremendoid), Thursday, 13 April 2006 23:25 (fifteen years ago) link

abby road still sounds really good. I'm sure a remastering will make it sound better but I listened to it yesterday carefully with headphones and was pretty blown away by how good it sounded.

I think the Anthologies are a pretty good distillation of the best stuff that makes up the two major bootleg series (ultra rare trax and, uh, whatever the other one is called; they have most of the same stuff on them). I could do w/out the talking on the first cd.

kyle (akmonday), Friday, 14 April 2006 17:44 (fifteen years ago) link

The Beatles are really smart to make people wait for every new issue. Keeps the interest up. When they are finally remastered it'll probably be on the cover of Time.

Mark (MarkR), Friday, 14 April 2006 19:58 (fifteen years ago) link

I assumed it was just a question of having to sort out all manner of legalities before anything happened in the Beatle world.

Lotta Continua (Damian), Friday, 14 April 2006 20:34 (fifteen years ago) link

What was interesting about the Anthology releases/phenomenon is that a lot of kids who were first getting into the band around that time all bought the Anthologies as if they were Greatest Hits Collections. I often see volumes of the Anthologies in people's collection as the only Beatles representation. "Just the b-sides, demos, and alternative takes for you eh?" They were hoodwinked!

ryan_w, Friday, 14 April 2006 20:46 (fifteen years ago) link

coincidentally (or perhaps not), michael jackson is also giving up his ownership of the publishing rights to sony this week, I think, to deal with some of his debt.

kyle (akmonday), Friday, 14 April 2006 20:52 (fifteen years ago) link

yeah i can imagine people getting suckered into the anthologies as some kind of definitive look at the beatles... that bluesy version of helter skelter is really wonderful. and the acoustic "across the universe".

xpost

dave k, Friday, 14 April 2006 20:56 (fifteen years ago) link

I'm pretty sure The White Album will always sound best on vinyl.

billstevejim (billstevejim), Friday, 14 April 2006 21:57 (fifteen years ago) link

Are there any Beatle albums that don't?

Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Friday, 14 April 2006 21:58 (fifteen years ago) link

Okay, so in that case, why does there need to be such a rush to get them remastered?

billstevejim (billstevejim), Saturday, 15 April 2006 00:59 (fifteen years ago) link

I for one hear absolutely no difference.

Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Saturday, 15 April 2006 01:05 (fifteen years ago) link

one year passes...

i mean it does take the piss doesn't it?

pisces, Wednesday, 8 August 2007 12:18 (fourteen years ago) link

lo-lo-lo-looooots of piss, sir! :(

t**t, Wednesday, 8 August 2007 15:19 (fourteen years ago) link

I bought Help for £1 in a charity shop the other week. It was cheap because the cover was ripped (and taped up again) and the vinyl's a bit crackly, but it's not scratched at all. Even with the crackles it sounds great - a lot better than the CD versions, The Night Before especially gaining an awful lot of character and energy. I too am amazed there's no proper CD remaster, I guess because people are still buying the current shonky versions.

The Wayward Johnny B, Wednesday, 8 August 2007 17:54 (fourteen years ago) link

four weeks pass...

This footage
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=compleat+beatles
of 'The Compleat Beatles' (snappy 1984 cheaply-made proto-ANTHOLOGY movie, shot on film and narrated by Malcolm Mcdowell) is
making me anticipate this happening all the more.

pisces, Wednesday, 5 September 2007 13:02 (fourteen years ago) link

It will happen before or since, but apparently at still takes time.

I expected they'd at least do "Sgt. Pepper" in June this year to coincide with its 40th anniversary, but they did't.

Geir Hongro, Wednesday, 5 September 2007 13:06 (fourteen years ago) link

But at least, with the current trend for remasters, the ultimate edition will be better. I hope they will do like The Bee Gees and Monkees remasters, and put out 2CDs with the stereo version + bonus tracks in stereo on one and the mono version + bonus tracks in mono on the other one.

Geir Hongro, Wednesday, 5 September 2007 13:07 (fourteen years ago) link

xxpost even some of the earlier Beatles albums had some great drum sounds. That opening CRACK! on “Any Time At All” comes to mind

terminators of endearment (VegemiteGrrl), Friday, 3 December 2021 18:59 (three days ago) link

but yeah, what Tarfumes said
60’s were awash with awesome drum sounds and Hal Blaine would def like a word

terminators of endearment (VegemiteGrrl), Friday, 3 December 2021 19:00 (three days ago) link

Definitely true that some of their early records had great drum sounds -- the drums on Please Please Me sound incredible (especially "Boys").

Montgomery Burns' Jazz (Tarfumes The Escape Goat), Friday, 3 December 2021 19:03 (three days ago) link

Y'all are right, of course. I just get vexed that there are a bunch of songs from that era that I love (e.g. "Substitute") that are let down by really ineptly-recorded drums. That rarely seems to have happened any more after 1970. (Back on theme, I particularly like the sound they got for Ringo's kit on "Come Together".)

Vast Halo, Friday, 3 December 2021 20:14 (three days ago) link

maybe its just your hearing

terminators of endearment (VegemiteGrrl), Friday, 3 December 2021 20:55 (three days ago) link

i swear lately on ilm there's this weird hoffman board thing where anything that doesn't sound like rumours is considered bad sounding or lo fi. so many 60s records have amazing sounding drums.


What I’m saying is…. 70s drums actually sound bad

brimstead, Friday, 3 December 2021 20:57 (three days ago) link

80s gated drum sound was an overcorrection to recapture presence and atmosphere or something

brimstead, Friday, 3 December 2021 20:58 (three days ago) link

i swear lately on ilm there's this weird hoffman board thing where anything that doesn't sound like rumours is considered bad sounding or lo fi. so many 60s records have amazing sounding drums.

which is why we should use drum machines if Ringo isn't available

So who you gonna call? The martini police (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 3 December 2021 21:00 (three days ago) link

maybe its just your hearing

No, it's an opinion, and mine is as valid as yours

Vast Halo, Friday, 3 December 2021 21:03 (three days ago) link

I can still eat corn if you mash it into a fine paste

Cool Im An Situation (Neanderthal), Friday, 3 December 2021 21:05 (three days ago) link

The rumors are true!

So who you gonna call? The martini police (Alfred, Lord Sotosyn), Friday, 3 December 2021 21:21 (three days ago) link

And now,

Your hosts for the evening,

Two monkeys fucking.

pplains, Friday, 3 December 2021 21:24 (three days ago) link

While I think '80s gated drums came first - Phil Collins/"Abacab" was one of the first to really push drums to the fore - they definitely cohabitated with increasingly bigger sounding reverbed-out everything as the decade progressed. The huge marshmallow snares would sound so small with everything else overinflated.

Josh in Chicago, Friday, 3 December 2021 23:21 (three days ago) link

I just get vexed that there are a bunch of songs from that era that I love (e.g. "Substitute") that are let down by really ineptly-recorded drums.

And “Substitute” is far from the worst of them. The drums on A Quick One and The Who Sell Out (with an exception or two) are abominably recorded. It sounds like there may have been a single mic within no less than 20 feet of the drums.

Montgomery Burns' Jazz (Tarfumes The Escape Goat), Friday, 3 December 2021 23:34 (three days ago) link

Shel Talmy, absolutely terrible engineer/producer, same with the early Kinks stuff that sounds like shite.

Maresn3st, Friday, 3 December 2021 23:42 (three days ago) link

Maybe you guys should tell him so on Facepalm.

Goofy the Grifter (James Redd and the Blecchs), Friday, 3 December 2021 23:44 (three days ago) link

Talmy was great. His Kinks records had far more bite and presence than most of the ‘64-‘65 Beatles or Stones records, and his Who records — the My Generation album and the two singles that preceded it, all engineered by Glyn Johns — were heavier than anything previously heard.

Montgomery Burns' Jazz (Tarfumes The Escape Goat), Saturday, 4 December 2021 00:01 (two days ago) link

Have to disagree, those first few Kinks records and My Generation have always sounded bad to me.

Maresn3st, Saturday, 4 December 2021 00:17 (two days ago) link

i swear lately on ilm there's this weird hoffman board thing where you leave the beatles thread for three days and there's like 400 new posts

war mice (hardcore dilettante), Saturday, 4 December 2021 02:32 (two days ago) link

400 posts
And it’s the same philosophy

Goofy the Grifter (James Redd and the Blecchs), Saturday, 4 December 2021 03:18 (two days ago) link

i mean if the Kinks & My Generation “sound bad” what is yr idea of “good sounding” records

terminators of endearment (VegemiteGrrl), Saturday, 4 December 2021 03:29 (two days ago) link

I'm going to side with those that think the early Who and Kinks records sound great. I mean not from the standpoint of technical proficiency, but their sloppiness and roughness is part of their appeal. I wouldn't want them to have glossy '70s studio polish.

Lee626, Saturday, 4 December 2021 04:13 (two days ago) link

exactly! the garagey sound is the bonus byproduct and what makes this stuff cool.

terminators of endearment (VegemiteGrrl), Saturday, 4 December 2021 05:16 (two days ago) link

I always thought The Stones "I wanna be your man" sounded like an insane carcrash of sound, especially for its time

Mark G, Saturday, 4 December 2021 12:50 (two days ago) link

Not as much as She Said Yeah, but yeah

Alba, Saturday, 4 December 2021 12:54 (two days ago) link

yeah, loved this.

Ste, Saturday, 4 December 2021 22:35 (two days ago) link

What I’m saying is…. 70s drums actually sound bad

Dear lord this take is as bad as saying Paul's beard is ugly

octobeard, Saturday, 4 December 2021 23:53 (two days ago) link

THANK YOU

terminators of endearment (VegemiteGrrl), Sunday, 5 December 2021 01:25 (yesterday) link

my response to that was going to be "have you heard a single r&b record from the '70s"

STOCK FIST-PUMPER BRAD (BradNelson), Sunday, 5 December 2021 01:29 (yesterday) link

I was being facetious, it’s just funny that they did all this stuff to tame the drums and make them behave or whatever

brimstead, Sunday, 5 December 2021 01:53 (yesterday) link

Ok I have to retract myself. Mccartney beard is a thing of beauty.

✖✖✖ (Moka), Sunday, 5 December 2021 03:45 (yesterday) link

I haven’t dug into Get Back yet; waiting for a day when HD Jr & I can binge it together.

In the meantime I’ve been bingeing a podcast called One Sweet Dream - their series on the breakup. It’s very long and VERY repetitive and sometimes EXTREMELY infuriating in SO many ways … but it also gets a lot right and it has rewired my thinking about the ‘68-69 period. I feel like it’s a really valuable addition to the story even though sometimes I want to leap through the speakers and shake the hosts violently.

The basic methodology is to look at the Beatles through the lens of Paul & John’s relationship - a “marriage,” as both of them characterized it many times - and observe their actions & re-listen to their words & try to understand how each of them felt & how their emotional entanglement would have driven behaviours & events. Lots to pick apart in there - both good & bad analysis - and a couple of Beatle-nerd pals & I have been enjoying kicking their ideas around, trying to tease the pepper out from the flyshit.

Their biggest flaw is the massive chip on their shoulder about Wenner & Lewisohn & the John stans; at least a quarter of each long episode is spent rehashing and tearing down the same tropes over and over rather than advancing their own arguments. Ultimately I wish someone would do a more rigourous job of pursuing their basic insights & building a nuanced and defensible narrative: that would be a real contribution to the scholarship.

Nonetheless.

war mice (hardcore dilettante), Sunday, 5 December 2021 17:05 (yesterday) link

"Check out this podcast that gets stuff wrong, is extremely repetitive and I want to kill the hosts."

kurt schwitterz, Sunday, 5 December 2021 17:34 (yesterday) link

B-b-but it’s about the lads!

Goofy the Grifter (James Redd and the Blecchs), Sunday, 5 December 2021 17:39 (yesterday) link

XP That's like most podcasts tho.

Precious, Grace, Hill & Beard LTD. (C. Grisso/McCain), Sunday, 5 December 2021 18:05 (yesterday) link

A fun project would be to edit the series down to about 4 hours of REALLY REALLY useful and insightful conversation. If I was unemployed and didn’t need to sleep ever.

war mice (hardcore dilettante), Sunday, 5 December 2021 18:05 (yesterday) link

Their biggest flaw is the massive chip on their shoulder about Wenner & Lewisohn & the John stans; at least a quarter of each long episode is spent rehashing and tearing down the same tropes over and over rather than advancing their own arguments.
― war mice (hardcore dilettante), Sunday, December 5, 2021 5:05 PM (fifty-four minutes ago)

yeah, this seems to be the trend in beatles-talk these days. for a while i was reading this one beatles blog that i thought was smart and interesting, but finally bailed because it felt like every post was about this stuff and i felt i'd spent enough hours of my life reading about why the "lennon remembers" interview was wrong about everything.

(The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Sunday, 5 December 2021 18:26 (yesterday) link

it's a bitter interview coming from a bitter time, certainly. he gets several things factually wrong in it, but surprise, lennon wasn't some beatles obsessive like most freaks are 50 years later

akm, Sunday, 5 December 2021 18:28 (yesterday) link

i think Get Back does a better job than anything else of really humanizing these guys and their relationship. the breakup makes absolute sense after watching it and remembering how young they were (despite how old their facial hair made them look). the comment from paul about how they used to live together and now they don't...that's it in a nutshell. there is no massive mystery to be solved. people got older and that is that.

akm, Sunday, 5 December 2021 18:29 (yesterday) link

xpost: yeah, lennon was blowing off steam at a weird time in his life and said some absolutely absurd stuff that he probably forgot about ten minutes after the interview. it's unfortunate that it got published as a book (though it is fun to read), otherwise i assume it would be fairly obscure now.

(The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Sunday, 5 December 2021 18:32 (yesterday) link

What's the gripe with the Lennon stans for us not in the now?

kurt schwitterz, Sunday, 5 December 2021 18:35 (yesterday) link

Yes, exactly, what's up with that gripweed?

Goofy the Grifter (James Redd and the Blecchs), Sunday, 5 December 2021 18:49 (yesterday) link

talking about podcasts and lennon, have you guys listened to song exploder's episode on lennon's "god"?

https://songexploder.net/john-lennon

it's pretty interesting to hear lennon talk about what kinds of songs he liked to write when he was in the beatles. it's pretty telling how he says the only songs he wrote from first-hand experience were "help" and "strawberry fields forever" and juxtaposes those with songs that were "phony"

the thing is, it seems like he rarely wanted to write very personal songs in the beatles. i'm not sure i would consider that a cop out or "selling out". the really personal stuff would fall under his "hangups", i assume, which is a shame, because more songs like "julia", "don't let me down" and "in my life" (none of which he mentions in the song exploder clip) would've probably been more interesting

anyways, i think some of that bumps heads with george's songwriting style, which would then make sense why he didn't like or at the very least didn't allow many george songs to be played in the beatles. which(!) would all makes sense, because he called "in my life" both his "first real major piece of work" and the most boring song he had written!

Punster McPunisher, Sunday, 5 December 2021 20:39 (yesterday) link

Lennon's apparent contempt for the whole enterprise was, in a sense, a mask. Because you can also see his obvious un-fakeable joy in a thousand places. Like all of us, he was large and contained multitudes.

No one will ever know which was the "true" Lennon, and we don't need to. He would mock us for wanting to know, because that is the essence of John-ness. I think he wanted to perplex us. To remain a mystery and confound our expectations for closure. That was his reaction to adulation.

Which was and is, of course, something he had the right to choose. It's both understandable and a little (dare I say) mean-spirited.

We also have the right to think he was kind of a dick. A gifted dick, but a dick nonetheless.

Ennui de Toulouse-Lautrec (Ye Mad Puffin), Sunday, 5 December 2021 22:18 (yesterday) link

Dude was the definition of the saying "closing the barn door after the horse has bolted"
He just said shit to say shit, half the time it was either to amuse himself or because he just hated press interviews.

terminators of endearment (VegemiteGrrl), Sunday, 5 December 2021 23:18 (yesterday) link

Most of the way through Part 1 and damn if Paul isn't being super condescending to George and Ringo. I've always wanted to defend Paul because if it weren't for his pushing we don't get Let it Be and Abbey Road. But it's interesting so far he hasn't really gone after John in the way he goes after the other two.

hocus pocus, alakazam (PBKR), Monday, 6 December 2021 02:09 (three hours ago) link

I wrapped it up last night, loved it even when it was repetitive, just so much fun to see that place and time with those guys. What a band. My two big takeaways were how universal Ringo's drum experience is — showing up, sitting behind the kit, waiting for the rest of the band to stop bickering and bullshitting and start playing something. And the harmonies — it's such an obvious thing, but they are the key to the whole sound, it's why the Beatles sound like the Beatles, and I just loved every time one of them was singing and the others joined in and it's just like someone flipped a switch. They sounded so good together.

<3

terminators of endearment (VegemiteGrrl), Monday, 6 December 2021 04:54 (one hour ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.