Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 64
  1. #26
    BooBs are elitist jerks shokhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by Resident Loser
    ...an incidental release to me...the remix was done to accompany a live presentation by Cirque du Soliel...that may be how it will work best.

    Supposedly the brainchild of George Harrison, who has since left the building...McCartney seemd ambivalent in the tee-vee piece I saw (CBS Sunday Morning with Charles Osgood) and Yoko...well...she's still Yoko...Don't recall input from Ringo...BTW, who sold the rights to the Beatle tune Macy's is using in its Christmas ads?

    Just another way to repackage old stock...I mean do we really need the string part from this cut to be overlaid on another and somehow melded into something not-so-completely different?

    jimHJJ(...I'll listen to Rubber Soul and Revolver thank you...and I get p!$$ed when they change the track sequence when goin' to CDs...))
    So you dont buy repackaged old stock as you put it? No remasters? No DCC or MFSL. You stay with org recording as poor as some are?
    Look & Listen

  2. #27
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Sounds to me like this is just another example of "synergy" at work. Since this mix was commissioned in conjunction with the Cirque du Soleil show, they might as well market the thing as a "new" "reimagined" Beatles album. Otherwise, it's nothing more than the "original cast soundtrack" for a Cirque du Soleil production. And how many people out there own the soundtracks for any of Cirque's productions?

    The mix would have been done anyway, so obviously they're trying to make a buck off of it. And the marketing of the album serves to further market the show, where most of the seats go for $125+.

    Quote Originally Posted by musicman1999
    Great replies.
    The reason i asked was that i had bought this dvd-a and all,brought it home listened once and put it away.Did not like it much at all,as 3 lock box said Stars on 45 came instantly to mind and that is not good.The one thing it does do is point out howmuch the Beatle catalog needs redoing,the SQ is much better than my old cd realeases.

    bill
    I don't know if the old Beatles albums will be able to match the new mix for sound quality simply because they were mixed on older analog tape recorders. The only alternative would be to do a complete remix from the original multitrack masters. There's only so much you can do by tweaking with a two-channel master tape.

    George Martin had to go back to the original multitrack masters to create the 5.1 mix, and presumably the two-channel mix was a mixdown from that 5.1 master. By going all the way back, and doing the remix on higher resolution equipment, Martin avoids the signal loss and audible degradation that occurs with multitrack mixdowns using older analog equipment.
    Wooch's Home Theater 2.0 (Pics)
    Panasonic VIERA TH-C50FD18 50" 1080p
    Paradigm Reference Studio 40, CC, and 20 v.2
    Adire Audio Rava (EQ: Behringer Feedback Destroyer DSP1124)
    Yamaha RX-A1030
    Dual CS5000 (Ortofon OM30 Super)
    Sony UBP-X800
    Sony Playstation 3 (MediaLink OS X Server)
    Sony ES SCD-C2000ES
    JVC HR-S3912U
    Directv HR44 and WVB
    Logitech Harmony 700
    iPhone 5s/iPad 3
    Linksys WES610



    The Neverending DVD/BD Collection

    Subwoofer Setup and Parametric EQ Results *Dead Link*

  3. #28
    Forum Regular nobody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,964
    Quote Originally Posted by shokhead
    So whats your cut off date to not listen to a band,30 years,25 years?
    I listen to plenty of bands 30 years old and some much older. I just don't get excited about a crass over-commercialisation of a defunct band's music for a quick buck. They just toss these repackagings out...and in this case let some people slice and dice the tunes, slap the Beatle brand on it and make a few quick million.

    I may be occasionally intersted in some music that gets an upgrade in sound...although I'm gererally just fine with old vinyl. But, after 30 years of searching the vaults and repackaging the music time and again, there is no new music to hear, no matter how they wanna spin it or re-edit the same old material.

  4. #29
    Forum Regular nobody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,964
    Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer
    The only alternative would be to do a complete remix from the original multitrack masters. There's only so much you can do by tweaking with a two-channel master tape.
    I'm not enough of a Beatles fan to care one way or another, but if they wanna release Beatle material, this really is what should be done. We're talking about one of the biggest, most-loved bands in history. They really do deserve this sort of deluxe treatment if they wanna re-sell their catalog rather than a silly stage show soundtrack like Love.

  5. #30
    BooBs are elitist jerks shokhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by nobody
    I listen to plenty of bands 30 years old and some much older. I just don't get excited about a crass over-commercialisation of a defunct band's music for a quick buck. They just toss these repackagings out...and in this case let some people slice and dice the tunes, slap the Beatle brand on it and make a few quick million.

    I may be occasionally intersted in some music that gets an upgrade in sound...although I'm gererally just fine with old vinyl. But, after 30 years of searching the vaults and repackaging the music time and again, there is no new music to hear, no matter how they wanna spin it or re-edit the same old material.
    Double talk but thats ok.
    Look & Listen

  6. #31
    Do What? jrhymeammo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    3,275
    Quote Originally Posted by Resident Loser
    ...which one's Pink?

    jimHJJ(...????...)
    I dont know..... the word on the street is that Pink is still lockeup in aylum writing songs for the devil.

    JRA

  7. #32
    Forum Regular MindGoneHaywire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Manhattan
    Posts
    1,125
    It's not doubletalk. That's a sincere post from a sincere poster. The only thing is, most of the repackaging took place 3 decades ago, and most of what's been released in the last 12 years was in fact unreleased, or at least majorly retooled. There were a couple of exceptions, but the 1 collection, I believe, shouldn't be viewed in the same jaundiced way as one might feel towards the repackagings of other catalogs. But then I'm a Beatles fan & I think that one thing you can't accuse Apple of is an endless repackaging campaign. If anything, they're quite selective about their releases.

    This looks like a marginal project, but I haven't heard it.


    RL:

    >.If I choose to waste my time spoutin' what should be the bleedin' obvious, why try to turn it into some sort of bone-of-contention?.

    My, aren't we paranoid. I was agreeing with you, more than anything else. Those who don't like the Beatles might well point to the slew of releases over the past 12 years & view it as a cynical repackaging along the lines of endless hits packages that are rolled out for many acts, to the point of leaving redundancy far behind in the rearview mirror. I don't think that Apple has done much to cheapen their catalog by watering it down with such completist-only rehashes, not even Let It Be...Naked or the revamped Yellow Submarine "songtrack." This looks a lot closer to a cynical repackage than anything that a Beatles fan would feel is reasonably necessary at this point. That said, I haven't heard it, but I can't say I want to.

    >The Yellow Submarine cartoon was a contrivance, a potential cash-cow as I see it...and even though I enjoyed the 'toon (particlarly when blitzed), it's soundtrack, like so many film soundtracks, were released more as a souvenir...keep in mind this is before home videotape...Was the soundtrack for [The Sound Of Music or Camelot somehow incidental?

    Oh, excuse me. It's not as though it was only four new songs, with the rest of it being George Martin's original score, passed off, in spite of its classification as a soundtrack, as a Beatles album...hmmm?

    If it's an argument you crave, then what else have I said to annoy you lately?

    I don't like others.

  8. #33
    BooBs are elitist jerks shokhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    1,994
    I havent heard it but i cant say i want to. Now if thats the fairest way to judge something,well its more double talk'n but heck,thats what goes on in the forums all the time anyhow.LMAO
    Look & Listen

  9. #34
    Forum Regular Woochifer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    6,883
    Quote Originally Posted by nobody
    I'm not enough of a Beatles fan to care one way or another, but if they wanna release Beatle material, this really is what should be done. We're talking about one of the biggest, most-loved bands in history. They really do deserve this sort of deluxe treatment if they wanna re-sell their catalog rather than a silly stage show soundtrack like Love.
    I don't know if that will ever happen. My understanding is that Lennon was very involved in the post-production work on the latter Beatles albums, and obviously his editorial input is not available. Then again, Genesis turned their entire catalog over to Nick Davis for new 5.1 AND two-channel remixes. What I've heard so far with the two-channel remixes definitely improves upon how the original mixdowns sounded on the early CD releases. And I read that Rush also turned their multitrack masters over to someone for 5.1 remixing.

    This Beatles project seems to be more a byproduct than a dedicated product. The Cirque production is at a custom-built theater-in-the-round with a specially designed sound system. Martin was brought in to do a multichannel mix, and obviously had something that could be readily packaged and sold. And obviously it's easier to market the show soundtrack as a "reimagined" Beatles album than as a Cirque soundtrack.
    Wooch's Home Theater 2.0 (Pics)
    Panasonic VIERA TH-C50FD18 50" 1080p
    Paradigm Reference Studio 40, CC, and 20 v.2
    Adire Audio Rava (EQ: Behringer Feedback Destroyer DSP1124)
    Yamaha RX-A1030
    Dual CS5000 (Ortofon OM30 Super)
    Sony UBP-X800
    Sony Playstation 3 (MediaLink OS X Server)
    Sony ES SCD-C2000ES
    JVC HR-S3912U
    Directv HR44 and WVB
    Logitech Harmony 700
    iPhone 5s/iPad 3
    Linksys WES610



    The Neverending DVD/BD Collection

    Subwoofer Setup and Parametric EQ Results *Dead Link*

  10. #35
    Forum Regular MindGoneHaywire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Manhattan
    Posts
    1,125
    >And obviously it's easier to market the show soundtrack as a "reimagined" Beatles album than as a Cirque soundtrack.

    Only to those who are willing to accept Beatles music as the soundtrack to a circus. That doesn't appeal to me any more than using Dylan's songs in a stage production. If someone wants to spend their time doing either, good for them. Looks like the Beatles thing is popular even though the Dylan thing was not. If someone wanted to utilize the music of a rock band that was/is in the context of a record album (or CD), and not a rock opera ala Tommy or even a 'concept' album, I don't know what would be a more fruitful area to plunder, though there's probably one or two that come to mind. But when you force something, you often end up with a hemerrhoid, which for some is synonymous with a 1979 movie starring Peter Frampton & the Bee Gees.

    Outside of any & all obvious reasons why one might reject any comparison of the' catalog to that of Rush or Genesis, there are some technical issues that I think were well-explained here:

    http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/mus...ges/64684.html

    I don't like others.

  11. #36
    Crackhead Extraordinaire Dusty Chalk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    below the noise floor
    Posts
    3,636
    Quote Originally Posted by shokhead
    I havent heard it but i cant say i want to. Now if thats the fairest way to judge something,well its more double talk'n...
    Why is that double talk? Pick something that you have found the least interest in, say, opera. If a new opera were to come out based on some high profile writer, would you want to hear it? In all likelihood, no, there are better things to be listening to -- things you will in most likelihood be more likely to enjoy. If it's based on the Beatles, then I will most likely not like it, and therefore have no desire to hear it. You're right, there's a small chance that I may love it, but I kind of doubt it, historically speaking. On the chance that I will not like it, I'm not going to waste my time giving it a chance. There's only so many hours in a day. That's all.

    It's not like it's a complete mystery -- it's not like there's a 50/50 chance of it being good or bad; there is some serious data here to make me think that I will in all likelihood not like it.
    Eschew fascism.
    Truth Will Out.
    Quote Originally Posted by stevef22
    you guys are crackheads.
    I remain,
    Peter aka Dusty Chalk

  12. #37
    Forum Regular nobody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,964
    Yeah, I'm probably being hard on the Beatles a bit since they haven't repackaged their stuff nearly as much as many others.

    I'm just not a big fan either repackaging in a mydiad of hits packages or trolling through the vaults to dig out "bonus" tracks...which they have done extensively. Occasionall, I"ll hear a gemm when bands do that, but more often than not, there's good reason why they were never released. And, yeah, that goes for my favorite bands too.

    So, while I do like listening to older music, I'm of the mind that the music should pretty much just be left alone, and have little interest in raping the vaults for bits and pieces. This release is different in that it's familiar material all mashed together, but still just seems oportunistic to me.

    And, I still hold to my original point...there is nothing new to glean from the Beatles at this point. Love 'em 'n listen to 'em if you like 'em. I'm the same with many older bands. But, I still see no reason to get all excited as if there's some new magical Beatles material dropping out of the sky.

  13. #38
    BooBs are elitist jerks shokhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    1,994
    Would you rather listen to your fav band on a 8-track or the same music on SACD?
    Look & Listen

  14. #39
    Forum Regular MindGoneHaywire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Manhattan
    Posts
    1,125
    >I havent heard it but i cant say i want to. Now if thats the fairest way to judge something,well its more double talk'n

    It's a project that's been released in conjunction with a CIRCUS. How is it doubletalk to say I don't want to hear something that exists because of something that has nothing to do with music?

    If there's one band whose music doesn't need to be re-imagined as the soundtrack to a friggin' CIRCUS, it's the Beatles. kindly explain how my comment constitutes doubletalk.

    I don't like others.

  15. #40
    Forum Regular BradH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Research Station No. 256
    Posts
    643
    Quote Originally Posted by Woochifer
    I don't know if that will ever happen. My understanding is that Lennon was very involved in the post-production work on the latter Beatles albums, and obviously his editorial input is not available. Then again, Genesis turned their entire catalog over to Nick Davis for new 5.1 AND two-channel remixes.
    I always heard Lennon was a one or two take kind of guy and left the technical stuff for others to work out. Maybe he got more involved in the later years but those were also the years when Martin left the actual mixing to subordinates. It's not like he did a bang up job on mastering the initial 80's cd's either. So if this Circus deal sounds good then that's a good sign. I never would've believed a remixed stereo Pet Sounds would sound so great but it does. Of course, it loses some of the magic in the process just like Sgt. Pepper's surely would in 5.1. That was a quirky sounding record with hard L/R imaging. I've got mixed reactions about this re-mixing issue. At this rate, we'll have 2-channel mixdowns from 5.1 on the shelves before a really good mastering job of the original 2-channel masters ever see the light of day on cd. That's my prediction. Oh well, I've got 62 of those Doc Ebbetts vinyl transfers and counting. But I have no interest in this Circus crap anymore than I wanted to see the stage production of Tommy. It strikes me as a lack of Harrison's creative imagination.

    Even if something happened to Martin it may not be the end of the world. John Burns is b!tching that he's not involved in the Genesis 5.1's because there's no way for Davis to know how those mixes were done. He's right, but Burns's mixes sucked. Genesis never had the sound they deserved from Nursery Cryme to the Lamb. Genesis are well aware of that too, so it's not surprising they would hand it over to someone they trust. Although, in the Beatles case, I suppose Martin is still obviously the "go to" guy.

  16. #41
    Forum Regular nobody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,964
    Quote Originally Posted by shokhead
    Would you rather listen to your fav band on a 8-track or the same music on SACD?
    Never heard SACDs, so don't have an answer there.

    Of course, I do prefer better quality sound, but I don't see that as the main issue for this release. Yes, they inproved the sound from what I've heard, but they also chopped everything into bits and pieces and put it back together all mashed up as if it is now something new and exciting. To me, that isn't enough to claim it as something new. I already said I think they should do a high quality remaster to make these things sound their best since so many people love them. But, that is not what this release is about in my estimation.

    If this release appeals to you...go for it. Enjoy. It really does not matter even remotely to me if this release appeals to you. And if it doesn, I hope you enjoy it. I'm not the music police. It doesn't to me at all for several reasons...namely the crass repackaging...the cheesy slice and dice...the circus showtunes connection...and last, but certainly not least, I really don't give a crap about the Beatles.

  17. #42
    Suspended 3-LockBox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Hey! Over here!
    Posts
    2,746
    Quote Originally Posted by nobody
    they also chopped everything into bits and pieces and put it back together all mashed up as if it is now something new and exciting. To me, that isn't enough to claim it as something new.
    Once again, I agree...nothing to get worked up about. No new songs, here, just someone playing DJ...bfd.

  18. #43
    BooBs are elitist jerks shokhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by nobody
    Never heard SACDs, so don't have an answer there.

    Of course, I do prefer better quality sound, but I don't see that as the main issue for this release. Yes, they inproved the sound from what I've heard, but they also chopped everything into bits and pieces and put it back together all mashed up as if it is now something new and exciting. To me, that isn't enough to claim it as something new. I already said I think they should do a high quality remaster to make these things sound their best since so many people love them. But, that is not what this release is about in my estimation.

    If this release appeals to you...go for it. Enjoy. It really does not matter even remotely to me if this release appeals to you. And if it doesn, I hope you enjoy it. I'm not the music police. It doesn't to me at all for several reasons...namely the crass repackaging...the cheesy slice and dice...the circus showtunes connection...and last, but certainly not least, I really don't give a crap about the Beatles.
    LMAO
    Look & Listen

  19. #44
    Color me gone... Resident Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Nueva Jork
    Posts
    2,148

    Errr...

    Quote Originally Posted by shokhead
    So you dont buy repackaged old stock as you put it? No remasters? No DCC or MFSL. You stay with org recording as poor as some are?
    ...the only CDs I've purchased, that are digital releases of vinyl that I already have, are minimal..So no, no SACDs etc. For the most part, new material for the new medium...with the exception of my faves Dylan, Beatles, Byrds, Davis and Coltrane...and that's because I want something familiar to play on my port GPX CDP($7USD after rebate)...Things have to be remastered from analog to digital, so it hands me a laff when I see old catalog touted with the whoop-de-doo words "digitally remastered"...fact-of-life, digital by-product, BFD...

    Only MFSL, or Telarc or other premium audiopile-type disks I've purchased were DTD, half-speed mastered or early DDA vinyl...and the only previously released material (which I didn't previously own) that I can recall was Steeleye Span's All Around My Hat collection...and Springsteen's Born To Run...

    jimHJJ(...I see no point in trying to duplicate my entire collection of old records and tapes...and besides many of them are no longer in print...)
    Last edited by Resident Loser; 12-11-2006 at 07:54 AM.
    Hello, I'm a misanthrope...don't ask me why, just take a good look around.

    "Men would rather believe than know" -Sociobiology: The New Synthesis by Edward O. Wilson

    "The great masses of the people...will more easily fall victims to a great lie than to a small one" -Adolph Hitler

    "We are never deceived, we deceive ourselves" -Goethe

    If you repeat a lie often enough, some will believe it to be the truth...

  20. #45
    Color me gone... Resident Loser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Nueva Jork
    Posts
    2,148

    Geez...

    Quote Originally Posted by MindGoneHaywire
    My, aren't we paranoid. I was agreeing with you, more than anything else.
    Well, pardon my error...but you have an odd manner of being agreeable IMO...

    Quote Originally Posted by MGH
    Oh, excuse me. It's not as though it was only four new songs, with the rest of it being George Martin's original score, passed off, in spite of its classification as a soundtrack, as a Beatles album...hmmm?
    All I said was I liked the 'toon...the original audio was neither here-nor-there from my POV...Yes...I see...very agreeable...

    Quote Originally Posted by MGH
    If it's an argument you crave, then what else have I said to annoy you lately?
    That you agree with me?

    jimHJJ(...BTW, have you heard The Little Willies' Cow Tippin'?...)
    Hello, I'm a misanthrope...don't ask me why, just take a good look around.

    "Men would rather believe than know" -Sociobiology: The New Synthesis by Edward O. Wilson

    "The great masses of the people...will more easily fall victims to a great lie than to a small one" -Adolph Hitler

    "We are never deceived, we deceive ourselves" -Goethe

    If you repeat a lie often enough, some will believe it to be the truth...

  21. #46
    Forum Regular nobody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,964
    Quote Originally Posted by shokhead
    LMAO

    Amazing...even without words you are able to continue to make completly illogical statements. Simply, amazing.

  22. #47
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    The Beatles? Isn't that the band that Paul McCartney joined after he was thrown out of Wings?
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

  23. #48
    BooBs are elitist jerks shokhead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    So Cal
    Posts
    1,994
    Quote Originally Posted by nobody
    Amazing...even without words you are able to continue to make completly illogical statements. Simply, amazing.
    Nobody,that fits you like a glove.
    Look & Listen

  24. #49
    Forum Regular nobody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Posts
    1,964
    I'm bored...go ahead and make some random comment for the last word since your oration skills seem to essentially consist of making random accusations with no basis in reality and then changing course to random weak insults once you run out of anything else to day.

  25. #50
    Class of the clown GMichael's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Anywhere but here...
    Posts
    13,243
    Can't you guys stop pissing at each other long enough to comment on my stupid (but funny) comment?
    WARNING! - The Surgeon General has determined that, time spent listening to music is not deducted from one's lifespan.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •