Log In
Register
11.54pm
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline
unknown said
MMT wasn’t conceptualized in black and white, they didn’t like it being played in black and white.
But they knew it was going to be, whatever the books say. They agreed to it being shown on BBC1, with a repeat on BBC2 the following day. However they try to excuse the BBC1 showing, they knew BBC2 was the only channel that did colour at the time. They could have specified the channel they wanted it shown on. Which is why I make the mono/stereo comparison.
"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
12.01am
5 November 2011
Offline mja6758 said
unknown said
MMT wasn’t conceptualized in black and white, they didn’t like it being played in black and white.But they knew it was going to be, whatever the books say. They agreed to it being shown on BBC1, with a repeat on BBC2 the following day. However they try to excuse the BBC1 showing, they knew BBC2 was the only channel that did colour at the time. They could have specified the channel they wanted it shown on. Which is why I make the mono/stereo comparison.
Yeah, I know that’s true, but it still wasn’t conceptualized in black and white. Also, I didn’t get what you were saying with the mono/stereo comparison.
All living things must abide by the laws of the shape they inhabit
12.04am
Reviewers
29 November 2012
Offline 
^exactly. The mono mixes WERE HOW THEY INTENDED the albums to be heard. They never intended MMT to be a B&W film.
"I know you, you know me; one thing I can tell you is you got to be free!"
Please Visit My Website, The Rock and Roll Chemist
Twitter: @rocknrollchem
Facebook: rnrchemist
1.33am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline That was my point about the mono/stereo comparison. Their interest was concentrated on one format (colour) but they knew it was also going to be presented in another format (b&w). Though it’s kind of weird, for their focus on format, for colour you can read mono, and for b&w you can read stereo. At that time they weren’t interested in the b&w, though they knew its first broadcast would be on a channel that was exclusively b&w.
"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
4.27am
1 December 2009
Offline 
Not exactly in the realm of “remastering”, but it would be nice to see an expanded BBC Sessions collection. Assuming that there’s more than 2 CDs worth of broadcast material still extant that’s worth release, that is. I know (from reading the Beatlesbible!) that the 2-disc set only covered something like 20% or 30% or whatever of the sessions that were recorded – I don’t know how much of it still exists, and how much is just alternate versions of the same songs already released. But I like to assume (imagine?) that EMI decided to just portion it out – release a double-CDs worth, see how it sells, and hold back a larger stash of it for possible later release.
GEORGE: In fact, The Detroit Sound. JOHN: In fact, yes. GEORGE: In fact, yeah. Tamla-Motown artists are our favorites. The Miracles. JOHN: We like Marvin Gaye. GEORGE: The Impressions PAUL & GEORGE: Mary Wells. GEORGE: The Exciters. RINGO: Chuck Jackson. JOHN: To name but eighty.
12.47pm
Reviewers
29 November 2012
Offline vonbontee said
Not exactly in the realm of “remastering”, but it would be nice to see an expanded BBC Sessions collection. Assuming that there’s more than 2 CDs worth of broadcast material still extant that’s worth release, that is. I know (from reading the Beatlesbible!) that the 2-disc set only covered something like 20% or 30% or whatever of the sessions that were recorded – I don’t know how much of it still exists, and how much is just alternate versions of the same songs already released. But I like to assume (imagine?) that EMI decided to just portion it out – release a double-CDs worth, see how it sells, and hold back a larger stash of it for possible later release.
I’ve got the 10CD bootleg set that has every available BBC sessions (which is about 98% of what they ever recorded for the BBC). There’s some GREAT stuff on there not on the 2CD set, and for the most part the sound is excellent, but there is a LOT of repetition of songs, so I’m not sure it’d be viable for Apple to release it at this point.
"I know you, you know me; one thing I can tell you is you got to be free!"
Please Visit My Website, The Rock and Roll Chemist
Twitter: @rocknrollchem
Facebook: rnrchemist
4.05pm
1 December 2009
Offline That’s the main thing I was wondering – how much repitition and duplication there is among the unreleased sessions.
GEORGE: In fact, The Detroit Sound. JOHN: In fact, yes. GEORGE: In fact, yeah. Tamla-Motown artists are our favorites. The Miracles. JOHN: We like Marvin Gaye. GEORGE: The Impressions PAUL & GEORGE: Mary Wells. GEORGE: The Exciters. RINGO: Chuck Jackson. JOHN: To name but eighty.
4.12pm
8 November 2012
Offline 
DrBeatle said
I’ve got the 10CD bootleg set that has every available BBC sessions (which is about 98% of what they ever recorded for the BBC). There’s some GREAT stuff on there not on the 2CD set,
Having just gotten the 2-CD set, *iz jellus*. 
parlance
4.26pm
Reviewers
29 November 2012
Offline parlance said
DrBeatle said
I’ve got the 10CD bootleg set that has every available BBC sessions (which is about 98% of what they ever recorded for the BBC). There’s some GREAT stuff on there not on the 2CD set,
Having just gotten the 2-CD set, *iz jellus*.
parlance
The full set is GREAT, no question, but there are something like 20+ different versions of From Me To You , She Loves You , Thank You Girl , etc. Which makes sense since they were plugging the singles and had to play them live. But it gets quite repetitive after a while. The cover songs are what made the 2CD set great and there are some more unreleased ones on the 10CD set that are great, like Talkin’ ‘Bout You, for instance, and different versions of the ones on the 2CD set.
"I know you, you know me; one thing I can tell you is you got to be free!"
Please Visit My Website, The Rock and Roll Chemist
Twitter: @rocknrollchem
Facebook: rnrchemist
12.53am
18 March 2013
Offline The only reason to remaster the Beatles’ catalogue again is to make the songs less (i don’t know what word to use here but a synonym of “static-y”) and more clearer, but they are very clear and no buzzing (Are you buzzing? I knew it was you, Ringo….movie reference) already, so there’s no need to remaster again.
3.06am
5 November 2011
Offline There’s always room for improvement, and one reason they would have for remastering again is for new fans. I know there have been a lot of people on the forum who got into The Beatles after their remasters and Rock Band came out.
All living things must abide by the laws of the shape they inhabit
5.58pm
1 December 2009
Offline Grr, there SHOULDN’T be any room for improvement! They should get everything right the first time, once and for all. Will it be easy for Apple to recapture that 09/09/09 hype again if they do it again in five years? I think not.
Do they really expect that I’m gonna go out and buy FIFTH copy of Sgt. Pepper ??
(Sure I will!…if they package the mono and stereo together.)
The cover songs are what made the 2CD set great and there are some more unreleased ones on the 10CD set that are great, like Talkin’ ‘Bout You, for instance, and different versions of the ones on the 2CD set.
There we go – that’s the kind of thing I’d love to see on an expanded 3-or-4 disc version of that release! (It’d be great to hear exactly where Paul got that “I Saw Her Standing There ” bassline, for one thing.)
GEORGE: In fact, The Detroit Sound. JOHN: In fact, yes. GEORGE: In fact, yeah. Tamla-Motown artists are our favorites. The Miracles. JOHN: We like Marvin Gaye. GEORGE: The Impressions PAUL & GEORGE: Mary Wells. GEORGE: The Exciters. RINGO: Chuck Jackson. JOHN: To name but eighty.
6.20pm
3 May 2012
Offline vonbontee said
Grr, there SHOULDN’T be any room for improvement! They should get everything right the first time, once and for all. Will it be easy for Apple to recapture that 09/09/09 hype again if they do it again in five years? I think not.Do they really expect that I’m gonna go out and buy FIFTH copy of Sgt. Pepper ??
(Sure I will!…if they package the mono and stereo together.)
Exactly. They know that most fans will jump at the chance to buy anything ”new” with The Beatles name on it, even if they could have improved them to that standard years earlier (and we know it). This kind of thing gets on my nerves a lot.
Moving along in our God given ways, safety is sat by the fire/Sanctuary from these feverish smiles, left with a mark on the door.
(Passover - I. Curtis)
7.59pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline I have the mono and stereo from 2009 why do i want it again? Why would i buy it again? I gave up this whole buying every concoction of a reissue with John’s catalogue – excluding true remixes (Beatles only) from the master tapes done better than the Yellow Submarine Songtrack .
If they want me to rebuy any of the albums then they have to start with the outtakes – and im not talking about 2 for each or taking them from Anthology, it should be at the very least a full bonus disc of at least 60 minutes. If they have any thought for the fans we would be getting deluxe boxes of the albums with each 50th anniversary LP but its Apple so we got a botched Love Me Do single – which i flipping well bought. And for Please Please Me ? Nothing. Oh wait an updated website with a documentary we already have. Wey-hey, tie me down otherwise i’ll dance myself to an early grave.
It took them 22 fecking years to get around to releasing the remastered catalogue. 22 fucking years!! Still, got it down from 25 for the Anthology series so probably thought they were being generous to us.
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
12.11am
16 August 2012
Offline I think it *might* be fair to say that at this point we’ve reach the maximum fidelity that the Beatles catalogue has to offer.
I’m sure there will probably be one more format to milk the last few dollars out of us (I’m thinking an interactive Blu-Ray album-by-album release), but since physical media is on its way out, we’re pretty much at the end.
As it’s already been said, the only other alternative would be to bundle mono & stereo verisons, include the singles chronologically or add outtakes.
Otherwise, enjoy your music people. Live for the moment.
E is for 'Ergent'.
