The Beatles remastered again?

Jason Schofield · Post by **Jason Schofield** » 7 Apr 2009 11:54 am

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20090407/en_ ... mastered_2

I just thought I'd throw this out there. I know their main catalog hasn't been remastered since the mid 80s' but how many times can I purchase the same albums in one lifetime? The Beatles are my all time favorite but come on.

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 7 Apr 2009 4:40 pm

Well - folks'll buy it, and EMI or whoever will have generated another chunk of income from those recordings. The odd thing is that it'll mostly be bought by people who have the music already!

I know, because I've done the same thing. I'm not a Beatles fan, but I still buy new compilations of Lonnie Donegan's music, even though I have the tracks over and over again. I'm always hopeful that some fresh sleeve-notes or a previously-unseen photo will emerge; it's happened just enough to keep my paying out!!!

I'm not comparing Lonnie with the Beatles ('though it's a subject for discussion

), but his was the soundtrack to my early-teenage years, and I'll be a fan 'til my dying day. For those of you five years younger than me it was probably the lads from Liverpool.

Bill Hatcher · Post by **Bill Hatcher** » 7 Apr 2009 6:45 pm

Roger Rettig wrote:I'm not comparing Lonnie with the Beatles

A very wise move. Skiffle compared to Sgt. Pepper....

I like them both. Lonnie has his place in musical history, but the Beatles.....whew!

In regards to the remastering...just so happens according to the article to coincide with the release of some sort of video "thingy" as George would have said. It is all merchandising.
The magic of the era is over. How much of an impact it had on so many. I was clicking channels on my radio the other day and hit a button and then another trying to find something to listen to. I heard a nano-milli-micro second of a sound and immediately knew that it was "Please Please Me". I was so tickled to flip the channel back and indeed hear that sound again and for one very fleeting nano-milli-micro moment I almost felt like I did 45 years ago without all the jaded feelings of the present that I have. Very exhilarating.

For the rest of musical eternity the Beatles will be repackaged and rehashed and remastered and re-whateverd.

Any remasters on Donegan?

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 7 Apr 2009 7:17 pm

Come on, Bill - Lonnie Donegan was a hero to my generation and the Beatles had their turn in due course. I worked many a show alongside them (I turned pro in 1960, so was a contemporary) and thought them average players. In 1962 they certainly couldn't have compared with the Donegan group of 1956/7 with its complement of leading jazz-players of the day.

Skiffle itself was a bastard music, and was typically performed by musicians of basic abilities; Donegan may have inspired them, but he towered above the rest of the field by virtue of the quality of his work.

Most importantly, it's questionable that, without Lonnie Donegan's influence, the Beatles would ever have existed in the form that they did. Lennon and Harrison in particular idolised him, as did I and countless others from that generation.

Every musical revolution needs to be examined with regard to the period in which it thrived; Elvis' early material sounds somewhat primitive today, yet its effect cannot be overestimated.

Has Donegan been 'remastered'? Well, some singles were in the 1970s, but I'm not sure what that proves one way or the other, unless it says that there's a case for improving the original tracks; maybe someone thinks the Beatles' tracks need it, but I'd like all musical history to left as it is.

I don't like seeing 'colourised' Laurel & Hardy films, either.

Bryan Daste · Post by **Bryan Daste** » 8 Apr 2009 12:19 am

Well, I'll probably get Sgt. Pepper's, and if it sounds noticeably better I'll probably end up getting all of them. The Beatles aren't making new albums, so let's get the most out of the old ones!

Guy Cundell · Post by **Guy Cundell** » 8 Apr 2009 1:43 am

The skifflers may have been fairly average, Roger, but some of them developed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0tAOIQiz-8

Bill Hatcher · Post by **Bill Hatcher** » 8 Apr 2009 5:24 am

Roger Rettig wrote:Come on, Bill - Lonnie Donegan was a hero to my generation and the Beatles had their turn in due course. I worked many a show alongside them (I turned pro in 1960, so was a contemporary) and thought them average players. In 1962 they certainly couldn't have compared with the Donegan group of 1956/7 with its complement of leading jazz-players of the day.

.

RR.

These "average players" have sold 600 MILLION records and changed everything there was to change in pop music and changed virtually the entire musical and cultural world in the 60s.

Just one of the many things that you can marvel at about Beatles is when you listen to the bootleg tapes of them in 1960 and then listen to Pepper in 1968 it is almost unbelievable the transformation in their compositional and musical abilities.

I remember back in the 60s we used to get these little Pathe short reels shown on TV with the likes of Donegan, Tommy Steele,etc. I enjoyed seeing them, but their impact was nothing like Beatles. Not to diminish them at all, but to just put things in perspective. I can surely understand his impact on yourself. When I was just getting started we thought that James Brown and all the R/B artists were the thing. When Beatles first came out, I really did not think that they were musically as innovative as the American artists they were copying. It took a few records for them to fully come into their own and frankly I appreciate them much more now than back then.

Surely what has been the focus of their longevity now is the song writing. Truly timeless.

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 8 Apr 2009 9:29 am

Bill,

I certainly agree that the Beatles didn't come close to the American artists they were copying. Donegan may have plagiarized US roots music, but his slant on it was unique, and he was an original for that reason. Remember, too, that we had Lonnie long before we'd even heard of Bill Haley or Elvis Presley. It was deeply thrilling, because it was the first guitar-driven music I was ever exposed to. (Tommy Steele, I'm afraid, was a pathetic attempt to recreate a 'British Elvis'; he didn't take me in, even when I was just a teenager!)

Then, when the US music scene had lost its impetus, Elvis' army stint had dulled his edge, the way was clear for the so-called 'British Invasion'. To me, that was a tragic turn of events! I know the Beatles have almost mythic status here in the USA, but I repeat that they were no better than average musicians. A large amount of credit must go to Epstien and his bevy of press-agents, because there's no doubt that their arrival in New York was extremely well stage-managed.

I'd been living on a musical diet of either Donegan, or the Everly Brothers, with Chet Atkins, Hank Garland or Jimmy Day, and a stellar rhythm-section, or James Burton garnishing Ricky Nelson's sides. It was dreadful to hear those same artists being negatively influenced by the somewhat rough-and-ready and amateur-sounding Liverpool players, and attempting to dumb-down their hitherto excellent output.

6oo million records? Sorry, that's not a persuasive argument to me; the Rolling Stones have, I imagine, sold a similarly heady total, yet I wouldn't give a CD of theirs house-room!

They're only popular musicians, all of them - Lonnie, John, Paul, George, etc - so we need to keep this in perspective. As a footnote, I'll repeat a story that I told here once before.....

When I was reacquainted with George Harrison in the mid-seventies on a BBC recording we were doing, he and I spent the best part of two hours in the BBC bar at Lime Grove Studios talking about nothing but Lonnie - we'd sing each other guitar-intros, discuss the relative merits of various tracks and/or solos, and he told me of queueing to see Donegan night after night at the Liverpool Empire in '57. George was an even bigger fan than I was!

I've become reigned to the fact that LD will never be accorded his proper due here in America - he hardly had a US hit record, apart from a couple of novelty items - but those British musicians like Clapton, Knopfler, Brian May and so many more will always acknowledge their debt to Lonnie.

Jimmy Currie, Nick Nicholls, LD, and Mickey Ashman; 1958

Brint Hannay · Post by **Brint Hannay** » 8 Apr 2009 9:50 am

Roger, it's all a matter of tastes, isn't it?

What makes a good or great musician in the ears of a beholder is, for many, quite independent of technical facility. And this includes beholders who are musicians themselves.

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 8 Apr 2009 10:12 am

You're quite correct, Brint, and the strange thing is that, had I been born, not in 1943, but five years later , I'd be vigorously defending my heroes, the Beatles!

It's more than just a matter of personal taste, but what we grew up with, and who first turned our heads....

I fully understand Bill's perspective - he's clearly a knowledgeable musician himself. I wonder what age he is....

Bill?

Earnest Bovine · Post by **Earnest Bovine** » 8 Apr 2009 10:13 am

Roger Rettig wrote: I know the Beatles have almost mythic status here in the USA, but I repeat that they were no better than average musicians. A large amount of credit must go to Epstien and his bevy of press-agents,

What would their recordings have been without George Martin?

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 8 Apr 2009 10:20 am

"What would their recordings have been without George Martin?"

Vastly inferior, Earnest, although I always felt that Paul had a decent melodic sense about him. I'd like to think the the legions of US fans give full credit to Martin for his invaluable role.

I should add, in fairness, that I do have 'Abbey Road' and 'Revolver' here on my CD shelves; I'm not completely immune to them.

Edited to add:

Bill wrote:

"I remember back in the 60s we used to get these little Pathe short reels shown on TV with the likes of Donegan, Tommy Steele,etc. I enjoyed seeing them, but their impact was nothing like Beatles."

With respect, Bill, you can't have any idea of what LD's impact was. It was a total revolution, and everything changed almost overnight - musically, and with some social overtones! You should have heard him as we did against a backdrop of post-way British austerity and food-rationing. He was a flash of technicolour, somehow, and the chills would run down your neck at the infectious power of the music.

Maybe it was no more than you got from the Beatles, but I promise you it was no less!

Olli Haavisto · Post by **Olli Haavisto** » 8 Apr 2009 10:56 am

They could have put both mono and stereo versions of each album on one CD, like they did on the Pet Sounds remaster.
Two box sets seems a bit greedy to me...
I guess I`ll buy the mono Sgt Pepper only and otherwise be happy with the old box set I have.

Brint Hannay · Post by **Brint Hannay** » 8 Apr 2009 11:03 am

Something I'm curious about, Roger: You refer to the Beatles' legions of fans in the U.S., their mythic status in the U.S., etc. I'm under the impression that, at least in their day, their popularity was far more widespread than just the U.S., encompassing not only Great Britain but most or all of Europe, and probably other areas of the globe as well. I assume the thrust of your references is just to contrast Lonnie Donegan's LACK of recognition in the U.S. with the Beatles' overwhelming success here, not to suggest that the Beatles' popularity here is not shared elsewhere?

Re Bill Hatcher's age: Some time back there was a thread "Find the #1 Song On the Day You Were Born".
His was "If" by Perry Como. As was mine. That would put him and me near the same age, as that song was not #1 for all that long, and I am 57 till midnight tonight.

Jerry Hayes R.I.P. · Post by **Jerry Hayes R.I.P.** » 8 Apr 2009 11:39 am

Roger, Lonnie made an impact on me as a teenager growing up in the Imperial Valley of southern California. We had a lot of black artists on the radio but we also had Lonnie Donnegan. His big hits I remember from those days were "Rock Island Line" and another called "Stewball" about a race horse or something. I can only remember that line, "Bet on Stewball, and you might win, win, win". He had a good beat going and a very unique voice IMHO..... I think the American rock and roll roots were probably black R&B artists mixed with country but I'd definately say that Donnegan was a "roots" artist in the UK and probably deserves to be in the R&R Hall of Fame!........JH in Va.

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 8 Apr 2009 12:53 pm

Happy Birthday in advance, Brint! Wow - you're nine years younger than me (3/23/43), and so is Bill, which would definitely have a bearing on his view of the Fab Four.

No, I don't mean to imply that they weren't huge in the UK and elsewhere - they were, but the US success was a bit more hyped, with those five singles at 1,2,3,4 and 5 simultaneously, and just at the moment they appeared on Ed Sullivan's show. It was certainly more gradual in the UK. They had 'Love Me Do', which only crept in the lower end of the chart in late-1962, then they released 'Please Please Me'.

(We first met them at that point - Feb '63, I think - we were rehearsing at a dance hall in Hull when John and Paul walked in and introduced themselves. John was miffed because they been double-booked. We - I was with singer Eden Kane - were in the right place, but they'd driven their ancient Bedford van from Liverpool for nothing, and returned empty-handed; they didn't stay that way much longer, because 'Please....' made #1 the following week!)

Initially it was more of a sub-teenage girl thing, too - as a twenty-year old I paid them little attention. They didn't play particularly well - no better than us - and, Lord knows, they certainly weren't the Everly Brothers!

No; I admit that I'm frustrated that there's not a more balanced view of the importance of LD vs. the Beatles, but I'm trying to impart how they affected me, which, to be honest, wasn't very much. I saw them more as contemporary working musicians who suddenly found them selves with a huge opportunity and made the most of it. George certainly took the view that they'd been very lucky, and declared in 1976 that 'We were no better than a lot of other groups...' That, and the fact that he loved Lonnie, makes him my favourite Beatle!!!

Jerry: Yes. 'Stewball' swung like the clappers, and was the B-side of his second hit single, 'Lost John'. Lonnie always made terrific double-sided singles. Nice to know at least one American liked him!!!

Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame??? No question, and there has been much discussion of his omission on the LD Forum of late.

To summarise, I suppose that Americans saw them rather like we 'saw' Elvis - as an almost mythic figure who's actual existence was in doubt. I've had conversations with Americans - some even pro musicians - who seemed to treat the Beatles as deity, and would pump me for tiny snippets of info just because I'd actually had some sort of contact with them (!!!

) Strange!

Bill Hatcher · Post by **Bill Hatcher** » 8 Apr 2009 8:29 pm

Roger Rettig wrote:I fully understand Bill's perspective - he's clearly a knowledgeable musician himself. I wonder what age he is....

Bill?

Fiddy 8.

Mike Perlowin RIP · Post by **Mike Perlowin RIP** » 9 Apr 2009 12:05 am

Here in America, the LPs were NOT the same as the British LPs. Our versions of Rubber Soul and Revolver was missing some tunes that were included on the British records. The Help album over here contained all the incidental music from the film, while the British Help album contained the Beatles' songs from the film on one side (I believe) and other songs they recorded that were not in the film on the other.

Here in America, Capitol released the yesterday and today album of tunes that had not made it on to other LPs, thereby making more money.

The same thing happened to the early recordings of the Rolling Stones. Albums like Aftermath and Out of Our Heads did not contain all the songs their British counterparts did.

The news said that these be releases would be the albums as they were released in England. We may have all the recordings, but now those of us who live here can hear them they way they were intended to be heard.

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 9 Apr 2009 4:48 am

Mike P. wrote:

"Our versions of Rubber Soul and Revolver was missing some tunes that were included on the British records."

You were lucky!!!

(Just kidding, just kidding...)

Mike Perlowin RIP · Post by **Mike Perlowin RIP** » 9 Apr 2009 5:00 am

Brint Hannay · Post by **Brint Hannay** » 9 Apr 2009 11:40 am

Speaking of how we value what we grew up with, it bugged me a lot that until recently the only CD versions of Beatles albums were the British ones. In spite of the fact that I knew those versions were the releases as they were originally intended to be, I wanted to hear the albums as they had been ingrained into my mental pathways through innumerable repetitions during my impressionable years. When that last sound of a song fades out, you're waiting for the first sound of the next that you KNOW is coming, and it just feels like a violation for something else to happen! I've gotten over that, but not before a friend did me the huge favor of copying all the original U.S. albums that were different from British (I lost my LP copies somehow along the way) from LP to CD, so I still have those available, too. (Little did we know they would eventually issue the U.S. versions as well. $:\$ )

Three of the songs that were omitted from the U.S. Revolver are among my favorite Beatles songs!

Roger Rettig · Post by **Roger Rettig** » 9 Apr 2009 11:53 am

A question for you Beatles afficionados out there....

Is it my imagination, or is the 'Sgt Pepper' album EQ'd with a very bright, almost tinny, sound? I found myself listening to it recently, and anticipating my favourite track ('She's Leaving Home') with pleasure, but I thought the mix to be very grating, even harsh-sounding.

Is that how it was forty years ago??? 'Abbey Road' sounds terrific to me, but I don't want a copy of 'Sgt Pepper' if that's how it's supposed to sound.

There you are - a whole 'post' by me with no mention of Lonnie Donegan!!! (OOOPS!!!

)

Brint Hannay · Post by **Brint Hannay** » 9 Apr 2009 12:08 pm

I've always felt that about the EQ on "Sgt. Pepper". I've tended to attribute it to the heavy multi-tracking with limited technology, but the album strikes me as having a sort of "canned" sound overall, which contributes to my not considering it the Beatles' peak achievement, as so many do (or did).

BTW, I think "She's Leaving Home" is an under-appreciated gem.

Bill Hatcher · Post by **Bill Hatcher** » 9 Apr 2009 8:10 pm

Are ya'll listening to vinyl?

Surely you are not judging the sound of Pepper from a CD.

Jason Schofield · Post by **Jason Schofield** » 9 Apr 2009 9:07 pm

I have a old scratchy MONO copy of Sgt. pepper's on vinyl and it sounds amazing.

BTW they reissued all the American versions of the albums in the Capitol box sets.

It's really fun to listen to compare all the different mixes from all the different sources.

The singles box set has some really amazing mono mixes too.

I always loved the British version of Help. Fantastic album.

p.s. (I love you)

Lonnie Donegan's music is superb. I love it all.