Beatles Box Set

Mine is (hopefully) on it's way from Amazon. Let you know asap after it arrives.

HMV have it for about £45.

Regards

Mike

Spending money I don't have on things I don't need.

£40 in FOPP and Music Zone.

Intrigued by this box. Let us know if it's good and I may well succomb.

regards
Richard S

I have it!!! Am listening even as we speak...

Haven't heard the U.S. stereo albums for decades, so can't comment on state of tapes used, etc. Some of the tracks are discreet stereo, some mono reprocessed into fake stereo. I don't like the latter as much, sound sort of "hazy". The mono tracks sound a bit better than the '87 ones, as they should I suppose. My only real gripe is the LP-style sleeves, which may damage the CDs. I would prefer Digipaks or jewel cases w. the plastic spindle thingy to raise & protect the CD surface. However...

Q: Does it rock?
A: Yeah, yeah, yeah!

Hearing the (added?) studio echo and channel separation really brings back the Beatlemania millions of us experienced in '64 (I was 10); the tracks really explode out of the speakers, and it's my $50 JVC DVD player I'm talking about (I'm supposed to take delivery of my new Naim source and amp later this week!).

Many of the UK Naimies will be puzzled by the track orders; I had to make a similar adjustment when the (UK-style) CDs came out in '87.

Like the BBC sessions, Anthology, Yellow Submarine "songtrack", Beatles 1 etc., this will be a Baby Boomer stocking stuffer for sure.

Play Loud.
Dance.
Enjoy being alive.

Groovers

I bought the box set today, and am pretty pleased with it. My initial listen was in the car, and it gave me goosebumps it sounded so good.

Getting it home to the big system ( The Nagger is out hurrah! ) still shows it to be fun, but there is a grainy element to the upper register, IMO, sounding a bit like digital hash or tape saturation. neverthe less, the CDs convey the excitement and hint at the impact of the Fab Four all those years ago.

It is also of keen ( Nerd ) interest to be able to toggle betweeh the stereo and mono versions of each track - so far, I think the mono sounds a tad better.

Bizzarely, while playing the mono version of "She Loves You", track 22 of "The Beatles Second Album", I heard what sounds like a squeeky toy at 1 min.47 seconds. Number 1 infant confirmed that its not just me having had one too many hand picked mushrooms: has anyone else noted this or is it actually common knowledge?

Anyway. If you like The Beatles, you will like this.

Regards

Mike

Spending money I don't have on things I don't need.

Got mine today, haven't had a chance to listen yet (the NAC is being serviced) but I luuurve the packaging! A nice set. Anyone know just how "limited" it is?

Kevin

Has anyone any idea, or insider knowledge, as to why this set is so expensive?

Although something of a Beatles 'completist', I find my wallet goes into spasm at the thought of shelling out the same as I would for 4 newly generated albums.

Fraser

quote:

---

Originally posted by Fraser Hadden:
Has anyone any idea, or insider knowledge, as to why this set is so expensive?

---

This is just a wild guess, but I suspect the reason why is these people want your money.

Why do they charge so much?

Because they can.

Note this is volume one......

Regards

Mike

Spending money I don't have on things I don't need.

I once had the idea of CDs being priced based on merit; in this scheme Britney Spears CDs would go for a quarter or something, Beatles CDs for full retail. Wilco CDs? $4.95 (massively overrated band); XTC, 5% off full retail, as they are excellent. Needless to say, I* would be the person responsible for pricing - most CDs coming out these days would be less than $2, so enjoy(?)!

*I'd hire Nick Lees & Tom Alves to assist me in this new career.

[This message was edited by bhazen on Mon 22 November 2004 at 18:02.]

As far as CD prices, for every Beatles boxed set that holds its value, there are dozens of remastered CDs in the HMV sales 56 months after release, so I'm not grumbling. My only question would be - if you already have the UK CDs, and '1', and the Past Masters CDs, is it really worth buying?

'there is a grainy element to the upper register, IMO, sounding a bit like digital hash or tape saturation' - hardly surprising - 1964 analogue tape!!
The squeaky toy isn't on the Past Masters or the '1' versions of She loves You...

Chris,

Tough call...might depend if you're American or not. I think it is marketed squarely at us ageing U.S. Boomer people who grew up with those versions. The one thing that may make them worth owning for the person who already has all the '87 CDs is (and I'm not sure about this, not having compared directly) that the mono tracks seem to sound better than the '87s.

Tangent: Are British people born from '46 - '64 referred to as "Baby Boomers" or have you escaped that awful generational label?

No, I'm afraid the label has stuck to us as well. What you have to remember is that all these 'labels' came out of American academic sociology departments in the 1960s, which movement had a profound influence on the erstwhile unsullied British Imperial education system. You guys must realise that your influence in the post-war period was dominant!

Bhazen

The term babyboomer over here tends to refer to those born 1946 to 1955.

This is because they were the first generation to experience the social revolution as well as having a fair disposable income theoughout their lives.

Also they were in the right age bracket to survive the jobless times of the early 70's and 80's and now form the wealthiest section of the UK community.

Most of us have good pension schemes which is now becoming rarer and couples in their 50/60''s are buying up Spainish homes like there was no tomorrow.

Being a babyboomer is rather good.

Regards

Mick....circa 1948

quote:

---

Originally posted by Chris Metcalfe:
You guys must realise that your influence in the post-war period was dominant!

---

Hence Billy Fury & Cliff Richard.

Mick: I generally agree with you on this subject. Although my own circumstances are modest (my own lack of ambition), I'm stunned sometimes by the wealth of (many of) my friends and acquaintances. Boomer millionaires are quite common. The influence of all that wealth means there's no lack of CD re-releases of good 60's music, for which I'm grateful.

Michael Fremer had this to say about this release:

quote:

---

This set isn't what The Beatles or George Martin wanted. It's the creation of an executive team that didn't want to release or appreciate the group in the first place! They chopped up the track order mostly for financial reasons that can be understood, but they "improved" the original sound only because they could [...added echo, compression, haziness and sometimes "reprocessed for stereo" mixes (when actual stereo mixes existed ie: "She's a Woman")...]. And now we're going to get to hear their revisionist history yet again. I'm so thrilled!

---

See Musicangle for the complete story:
http://www.musicangle.com/shownews.php?id=61

I have some of these US editions as Japanese vinyl reissues from the 80's and they are a curiosity item only. The vinyl UK releases (or Japanese LP editions of the same) are definitely better in all ways.

Paul

[This message was edited by Paul B on Sun 05 December 2004 at 3:12.]

[This message was edited by Paul B on Sun 05 December 2004 at 3:13.]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Paul B:

I have some of these US editions as Japanese vinyl reissues from the 80's and they are a curiosity item only. The vinyl UK releases (or Japanese LP editions of the same) are definitely better in all ways.

Paul

---

Having lived with these CDs for a while now (and the UK versions since '87), I pretty much agree with you. In hindsight, it seems rather hubristic for the Capitol Records people to have chopped'n'repackaged the original UK versions. The main value here is for US consumers who are nostalgic, as I was; though for me, Please Please Me, With the Beatles, A Hard Day's Night and Beatles For Sale remain the standard.

One decision the Capitol A&R guys made that I stand by was combining the UK Magical Mystery Tour EP with "Strawberry Fields Forever", "Penny Lane" etc. to come up with what has become my favourite Beatles album; in '87, EMI/Apple obviously agreed with that judgement.

I have put the Beatles box set on my Christmas wishlist; I currently intend to buy it for myself on December 26th if my wife dones't come through.

Obviously I love the Beatles' music; but for whatever reason I've never picked up the real early stuff. (My collection is limited to Revolver (cd), Rubber Soul (cd), Sgt. Pepper (vinyl and cd), Magical Mystery Tour (vinyl), "1" (cd), Let It Be Naked (cd), Live at the BBC (cd) and White Album (vinyl)). While I understand that the UK versions are the "truer" form and what was intended, that does not matter much to me now. What I want to get is the best sounding cd versions of the early Beatles music. So, I guess my question at this point is that, conceding the UK vinyl might still be the best sounding, does the new Box Set represent an improvement in sound quality over the UK or US cds already out there? In other words, if I don't care what originally what was intended and do care solely about the quality of the recording, am I better off getting the UK cds from the 1980s or the new Box Set. Thanks.

Mike

Well, MF has changed his mind on this set:

quote:

---

I was wrong. These four Frankenstein monsters created by Capitol in 1964 out of parts stripped from various UK originals sound fantastic and yes, revisiting them after decades of neglect and dismissal opened a floodgate of intense memories...Ted Jensen did a brilliant mastering job. The clarity, delicacy, transparency and three-dimensionality he's managed to transfer from the tapes to the CDs will keep you mesmerized...

---

see: http://www.musicangle.com/album.php?id=268

Paul

Paul - Thanks for your post. I was wondering if people thought the Box Set represented an improvement over earlier CD versions.

Mike