Naysaying the Naysayers: The Beatles' CDs by the Numbers
This isn't for those music fans who pre-ordered the newly remastered Beatles CDs the instant they were offered. It's not for the people who have double-checked their stereos to make sure they're properly wired to capture every nuance of newly-tweaked sound. And it's certainly not for the folks who, when they heard that the Fabs' catalog was going to be reissued in both stereo and mono, didn't think twice about buying both boxes.
No, this is for that small but stubborn minority of naysayers who rolled their eyes when they heard that the Beatles' recorded legacy was being given a state-of-the-art sonic overhaul for the first time in more than two decades. "Ripoff artists," they snorted. "They keep repackaging the same music over and over again."
Well, you know what, naysayers? You're wrong.
Let's look at it by the numbers. In the CD era, EMI has released 14 Beatles albums, not counting the straight CD reissues of the original British LPs in 1987. Of the fourteen, five consist partly or entirely of previously unreleased music (Live At The BBC, Anthology 1, 2, 3, and Let It Be... Naked). Two are collections of singles and rarities that weren't included on the British albums (Past Masters Vols. 1 & 2). Three are well-thought out, fairly comprehensive greatest hits collections (the CD versions of the classic "red" and "blue" LPs, which were originally released in 1973, and 1).
Which leaves a grand total of four questionable Beatles releases over more than a quarter century. These include:
The Capitol Albums Vol. 1 and Vol. 2, featuring the American mixes, sequencing and artwork of the early Beatles' LPs in both stereo and mono, which American fans had been requesting for years;
Yellow Submarine Songtrack, which jettisoned the incidental music from the 1968 film in favor of more Beatles songs;
and Love, the inessential but interesting 2006 mash-up collection with absolutely stellar remixing and remastering.
And not a skimpy, ten-song compilation in the batch. By comparison, in the '90s alone, RCA released over 50 Elvis CDs, a good chunk of 'em short collections of random hits, and Frank Sinatra's various labels put out over 30 "new" collections of his -- some essential, many pointless. The Rolling Stones' 1971 album Sticky Fingers has, by my count, been issued on CD a half dozen times with assorted packaging and remastering variations since the mid '80s.
And let's not forget that unlike Elvis, Ol' Blue Eyes, the Stones and too many other artists to count, the Beatles have never committed the cardinal sin of baiting a greatest hits CD with one or two unreleased tracks to get all the die-hard fans to buy it. In fact, they've only put out one single-disc greatest hits CD, the aptly-titled 1, which not coincidentally has become one of the biggest selling albums of the decade. But do they get any credit for keeping their oeuvre down to manageable levels and not exploiting their audience? Not hardly.
So why do the Beatles get such a bad rap for supposedly abusing their legacy? Maybe it's because, when they put out a "new" record, it's handled with enough care, as far as production, packaging and promotion are concerned, so that it inevitably sells well. Take, for instance, the seemingly pointless Yellow Submarine Songtrack, released in 1999. On closer inspection, it had a lot going for it. Not only did it expand an album that was originally six songs and a side of George Martin's orchestral music into a tasty 15-track collection, but it also was remixed and remastered so that it had the best sound of any Beatles CD to date. And as a result, it made the Top 20 of Billboard's album chart. The Who (to randomly name another classic British rock band), on the other hand, have had more greatest hits albums come out than you can shake a Rickenbacker at, so when they put out a "new" compilation, it's hardly earth-shattering news.
To be fair, I agree with the many fans who are grumbling that the Beatles' CDs have room for both the stereo and mono mixes on one disc, and are questioning both the band and EMI for putting the mono discs in a separate, limited-edition, mucho-expensive box. But let's be honest -- unless you're a hardcore Beatlefreak, do you really care about stereo vs. mono mixes? I mean, nobody's putting a gun to your head to make you buy 'em both. And given EMI's stellar track record in handling the their biggest cash cow, I'm willing to let this one slide.
So hopefully, when you're reading about Wednesday's Beatle-CD-mania, you'll remember this little math lesson -- and give a last listen to your crappy-sounding first generation Fab Four discs -- before you go around poo-poohing the news.
Follow Tony Sachs on Twitter: www.twitter.com/RetroManNYC
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Why can't they make a surround sound version of these classics. The Love DVD-Audio was a tease of how it could be. I would love to hear Rubber Soul or The White Album in 5.1 or DTS. Remastered stereo is fine but it's not enough to get me off my butt and buy my Beatles Catalog for the third or fourth time.
Excellent post, Tony. You could also include the "other" Elvis -- Costello, that is -- in abusers of the re-release. How many times has his entire catalog been reissued by how many different record companies? (Not to mention the endless compilations.)
As a Beatles completest my question is, whatever happened to Vol. 3 of the Capitol Albums? We got Meet the Beatles through Rubber Soul, only. They even gave us The Early Beatles, a greedy repackaging of V-J's Introducing the Beatles. Capitol could hold back on remastered re-release of the double album The Beatles Story (ha!) but what about Yesterday ... And Today and Revolver?! Okay, technically, they could hold off on US Revolver, as artwork is identical and tracking is UK Revolver minus three Lennons but Yesterday ... And Today?! What gives?
Live at Hollywood Bowl would be nice too. Any insights on that?
Yeah as a raging Elvis fan I def. have to agree w/ you-they've shotgunned the market w/ the same old 30 or so Elvis tunes repackaged ad nauseum-though they DID get it right in 2002 w/ Elv1s and etc. That is the way to do it. But they jest can't resist going back to the well can they?! and silly me I buy many of those anyways.
The Beatles if anything have been sluggards w/ the reissues. Do more, sez I. This looks like a nice set.
"I am the Walrus" and "Come Together" sound, remastered, like they are 100 years ahead of the times, from the perspective ot todays music.
Well, what i want and have been waiting for years is the DVD release of Let it BE. And I want it now! I've been waiting for so long. I think about the poor souls that have pasted on waiting to see this DVD. It's the last LIVE Beatles performance! As a bonus to the Let It Be release, why not show the entire rooftop concert without the edits of crowd reactions. Distribution of this film has been slim to none over the past twenty years, so let's hope for a DVD release soon!
"On January 21st, 1959 the Rutles story really began at 43 Egg Lane, Liverpool, where Ron Nasty and Dirk McQuickly first bumped into each other. Ron invited Dirk to help him stand up. Dirk, merely an amateur drinker, agreed and on that spot a legend was created - a legend that will last a lunchtime. They were soon joined by Stig O'Hara, a school leaver of no fixed hairstyle, but it would be another two years before they found their regular drummer, Barrington Womble, hiding in the van. When they did, they persuaded him to change his name to save time and his haircut to save Brylcreem. He became simply Barry Wom."
lol.. darn.. this is when I get nostalgic for my teens..
LET IT BE.. saw this several times at the cinema.. there was this 99cents cinema on SUNSET (gone now) that showed this..lol..
then when I moved to London I ended up working with the director of this -- MICHAEL LYNDSEY-HOGG.. then at another oppurtunity.,., I spent a day at TWICKENHAM STUDIOS.. where they shot t his.. I kept thinking of the beatles.. such a small studio in the middle now of a residential area.
then that roof.. was at SAVILE ROW.. overlooking Regent St..
I've never seen Paul.. but I've seen George & ringo mooching on RODEO.. & John & Yoko at the BRASSERIE ON SUNSET..
Great points.
The unfortunate thing is we live in the era of MP3 files. No matter how vastly improved iTunes (256kpbs upgraded from 128kpbs) sound has become, most of us, myself included, probably do the majority of our music listening via our MP3 players. That makes the hefty price point for the Box Set (which in my small world.....I take some credit for since EMI originally had only scheduled the titles to be released as individual albums, until I wrote to both entities since it was so laborious to pre-order each title individually.....well, I can fantasize can't I?) not fully enjoyable and user friendly.
That said, though I wont be pulling out my old portable CD player, maybe the upside is now being forced to play our music on our stereo systems again.....for the full appreciation. And that's a good thing....one less opportunity to isolate. (I have own the stereo box set).
It will be interesting to see that once The Beatles are released digitally, how lucrative will it be.
You'll buy the compilation(s) or you won't.
You appreciate the Beatles' music for what it is or you don't.
Anyone who thinks the new CDs are overkill should listen to them first. I've been listening to the Beatles for almost 40 years, from 5 years old through high school, college and now middle age and know every sound on every song. I was at Wal Mart last night and on a whim decided to check the CD aisle on the off chance that the clerks were ahead of themselves and had already stocked the new discs. To my surprise, they had and I left the store last night at 9pm with Magical Mystery Tour and the White Album. I put on MMT in the car and was immediately impressed by the sound. I even drove the long way home so I could listen to Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane. The remastered versions are cleaner, with heavier bass and less harsh highs. Having listened to the '87 versions for years, the new discs are almost a revelation. The reviewers are right, certain sounds are clearer and others I don't remember hearing since my last turntable crapped out about 10 years ago. If you're a Beatles fan, buy the discs. Even if MP3s eventually are released, they won't come close to the quality of the new releases.
My favorite Beatles CD changes from week to week, depending on my mood. But of their 14 albums, if you start with only two, what made you choose Magical Mystery Tour? As opposed to say, Revolver, Abbey Road, Sgt Pepper and so on? An interesting, offbeat choice so I wondered -- is it your favorite of theirs or does it hold some personal meaning?
Who could complain about a Beatles record? Put out thousands of them and that's still not enough!
Late one night, not very long ago, I had a dream that the Beatles were still among us, making us laugh and sing in the same way they did when they were the undisputed Princes of the Planet Earth all those years ago. That's what was so wonderful about the Fab Four: they were a great comedy team - one of the greatest. When I awoke from that dream - thinking it had been real - the blunt realization that the Beatles are gone forever was too depressing to even contemplate.
In 1995, the night the video "Free As a Bird" premiered on national television (the first "new" Beatles song in over a quarter of a century), I watched it with a young woman who was born in 1970, the year they broke up. Hearing them sing together again - Paul and George sounding strong and clear; John, by that time long dead, his voice transferred from an old and faded cassette tape, sounding as if he were singing from far, far away - was a very moving experience. When she noticed my reaction, she laughed and said, "Oh, Tom! What's the big deal"? I told her that no one who didn't live through that turbulent era, could possibly understand what that band meant to their troubled generation.
http://www.tomdegan.blogspot.com
Tom Degan
Yeah, I hate to burst your bubble, but the song wasn't that great - one of Lennon's demos filtered through a morass of ELO haze.
I have a prescription for your depression. Watch A Hard Days Night. I watched it for the first time in a long time recently. I was a little afraid it wouldn't hold up but I laughed my butt off. It was like watching a Marx Bros. movie.
The weird thing is, I've heard bootlegs with better sound than the best of the EMI issues [YS "Songtrack", the red and blue boxes, parts of the "Anthology" series], save of course the DVD-audio of "LOVE" which---even as sonically fine as it is---is also largely a bunch of mash-ups. From the looks of the new batch of re-issues---no remixing, just the original mix-downs for vinyl tweaked for sound as close to the vinyl as possible---a third re-issue of the Beatles catalog will be necessary down the road apiece.
I can understand cleaning up the kinks in the sound. It would be a rip-off to release even more of the horrible outtakes and throw-away versions of their songs. Rev. Bookburn - Radio Volta
Shortly after Michael Jackson died, Paul McCartney went on David Letterman and whined yet again about MJ buying the Beatles catalog. So I have an honest question to die-hard Beatles fans: why do you think they sold the catalog in the first place? Paul McCartney was/is massively wealthy, certainly wealthier than MJ when the catalog came up for sale. He could have outbid Michael Jackson and bought the catalog back if it bothered him so much. Why do you think he didn't, and is that what people mean when they say they (the remaining Beatles) are abusing their legacy?
I will repky to this--as I,too am quite fed up about t his misconception how MJ got hold of this beatles catalogue.. long story.
In 1962.. when Lennon-Mccartney decided t o write their own songs-- Brian Epstein went to his friend DICK JAMES(fr Decca records) for advise..as they needed a publisher for these songs/compositions.. so James advised Epstein to form their own publishing company.. HENCE.. NORTHERN SONGS LIMITED was formed.. and it dvided 4 ways.. 25%each between Epstein/James- Lennon-McCartney..
who would have known these 'boys' will end up to become the composers they became.?? Nortern songs was a goldmine.
when Brian died.. his brither Clive took over his estate. I do believe they still own this 25% though
Clive(sweet man.. had the chance to have a long chat with him) have passed away-- so his heirs have it to this day.
meanwhile, by the late 60's-- early 70's-- Dick James had financial problems.. he sold his share to THEN SIR LEW GRADE.. & Nortern songs became part of ATV CATALOGUE. when in turn Grade w as s elling off his assets.. he sold ATV to an Aussie tycoon. ROBERT HOLMES A COURT.. when he was selling it off.. JOHN BRANCA ALERTED MICHAEL.. Paul & Yoko knew it was up for sale.. but they didn't want to cough up the going price. they were apparently prepared to buy it for like $15 mil.. split between them.
Michael bought it for $47 million in 1988?.. CASH..
PS..apologies for typo errors..
there's an after thought- John & PaUl found out later James sold his shares of Northern Songs. and John was dutifully pi**ed off..as he felt he should have told them.. so he & Paul could have bought it. and having a bigger stake with their own songs.
Thanks for the reply. It strikes me that the operative phrase in your explanation is "they didn't want to cough up the going price". It's ridiculous that some Beatles fans think that Michael Jackson "cheated" Paul McCartney. I've even seen suggestions that MJ should have left him the catalog in his will! Paul could have afforded it on his own, without Yoko Ono. Perhaps psychologically he couldn't bring himself to pay all that money for something he had created in the first place. If that's so, he cheated himself.
I don't think McCartney's upset was with Jackson buying the catalogue per se. It was Jackson's percieved disingenuousness during their collaboration. Simply, Jackson was in the midst of working with McCartney while deep in the negotiation for the purchase, something he was not completely forthright about.
untrue.. pure fallacy.
Paul told Mj about buying up music rights.. & showed Mj his extensive list.. his catalogue.. the EASTMAN'S by the way w ere the ones who got Paul to invest in this..
they were doing SAY..SAY.. SAY.. so MJ's teasingly told Paul.. he.. he.. he.. I'll buy your music.. Paul said.. yeah.. right..
soon after the catalogue went on the market.. branca told Mj.. the rest MUSIC FOLKLORE..
See Sal Nunziato's Profile
I was hoping to see something like this posted. Great job. I am down to my last nerve waiting for my boxes to arrive. Yes...boxes!
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
