lotus (08/17/82)
For all BEATLES fans:
The next round of Beatles conventions (i.e. Beatlefest '82) are
scheduled as follows:
CHICAGO - Aug. 20-22 at the Hyatt Regency Chicago
NYC - Oct. 29-31 at the New Jersey Meadowlands Hilton
HOUSTON - Nov. 27-28 at the Westin Galleria
This is not meant to be an advertisement for mark lapidos; but I must
admit that he puts on a grade-A show.
Ticket prices are reasonable; but inflation really shows with dealer
tables priced at $140. for all 3 days at Chicago.
It will be interesting to see what desirable items will be for sale
this year, in Chicago anyway. Last year some nice GOLD and PLATINUM
awards exchanged hands for $500. This is remarkable since I recall
that several years ago (1977 ?) they were going for approximately
the same price: $400 - $500. BEWARE of conterfeit GOLD record awards;
they are not that difficult to forge.
I would like to hear from Beatles fans regarding these conventions
or whatever.
T. Deak
Bell Labs, Indian Hillmessina@ihuxl.UUCP (08/22/83)
Just like David, I too had no older siblings that played their early sixty commercial music. By no means are the Beatles a very talented group, just monsterestly commercial. Ringo Starr is perhaps the poorest drummer that ever made it in a rock and roll band. George, any 15 yr old guitar player could play his stuff. Paul and John are the only ones I have any respect for. Late sixties beatle music (white album, Sgt. Peppers, etc), in my opinion, is there best stuff musicly, but by no means would i call it the BEST. It was very creative for the time and they were the first to use the studio the way they did, but that is only because they had the $$$$s and their name to: 1) Spend months/years in the studio. 2) Use the best studios, equipment, and effects. 3) Have the best engineers. 4) Do the best drugs (couldn't leave this out). I'm not trying to cut down the Beatles or anything like that, I have great respect for what they did. I like most of there music, but its not the best (musically). They do have some great (maybe the best) lyrics and concepts (Is Paul dead ??, etc). Better albums that the white album: Far too many to list !!!! For that time period there are not too many, but it still is not the BEST. ihuxl!messina
ajy@hou2b.UUCP (08/23/83)
Just some random replies to the critique of the Fab Four.... 1. Hindsight is 20/20. Given today's (often over-produced) Rock-and-Roll, it's easy to look at the Beatles as simply an extremely successful Bubble-Gum group. At the time, they were considered quite refreshing. It's no different today. In my mind punk and new wave music, with its the cleaner, simpler lines, was a revolt against the pompous rock of the early to mid seventies. The Beatles offered people a something besides the likes of Phil Spector. And I guarantee you that were going though the cycle now. People will soon tire of this synthesizer Rock. 1a. Simplicity is its own virtue. I'd much rathrer listen to "She Loves You" than anything Yes or Genesis has ever done. 2. The Beatles were one of the first rockers to have personality beyond their music. They were, infact, quite witty. 3. Assembling virtuosos(sp?) to form a band is no guarantee of success. Ask George Steinbrenner. 4. The Beatle's recording studios were, in fact, quite primative. They stayed with George Martin and the Abbey Road studios out of, perhaps, loyalty.
eli@uw-june (Eli Messinger) (08/23/83)
I think lake@alberta is on the right track... The Beatles generally
didn't have up-to-date multitrack studios. Sgt. Pepper's (possible the
most innovative "rock" record of all time) was recorded on a FOUR TRACK!
And as to virtuosity equating with "best" music... let's just take a look
at Toto. No, on second thought let's not! Music is much more than the
individual parts that go into it.
I would venture to say that alot of people are brainwashed by all of the
Beatle publicitity in another sense. There seems to be a knee-jerk reaction
against bands and performers that get too popular. Why do some fans
abandon groups when they become well known/liked? A good example might
be the Go-go's. When they were touring England, and their first single
on Stiff came back to America it was an instant underground hit. But as
soon as it raced up the charts for multi-platinum success they were
relegated to the mass-culture-pop-pile. The same thing has happened to
Joan Jett to some extent... she had quite a following as a Runaway, and
even through her first solo-LP, but when she hit the top of the charts
alot of people accused her of selling out and jumped ship. (Which is
rather funny since "I Love Rock'n'Roll" was recorded as the B-side of her
first solo-single, which was released >years< before it hit the charts!).
What's so cool about forsaking your own musical tastes so as to constantly
be bucking the popular trend?
...uw-june!eli (yes, a Monkees fan too)
Ps. The Beatles meet Phil Spector actually came to light when Mr. Phil
mauled (my opinion) the tapes of "Let It Be."rlr@pyuxn.UUCP (08/24/83)
Re: innovativeness of Sgt. Pepper Paul McCartney admitted that the motivation behind doing an extravagant album like Pepper was the Beach Boys' "Pet Sounds". When Paul heard this album he couldn't believe his ears, and felt that the Beatles had to match or beat this record. Thus you hear many of the same sounds (animal noises, orchestrations, etc.) on the two albums. Frankly, my opinion is that the Beatles wrote flimsier songs during the Pepper/Mysterytour period, depending more on studio gimmickry. I should note that "I Am the Walrus" is probably my favorite Beatles cut. They have written better SONGs than "Walrus", but (with the possible exception of Revolution 9) they never reached that same pinnacle of sound wizardry. So much for the innovation of Sgt. Pepper's. This period gave us John Lennon at his most creative, Paul McCartney at his pinnacle in terms of melody writing (*), and George Harrison at his most annoying (though I still like the drone songs---Blue Jay Way, All Too Much). (* - McC. was so prolific at this point that gems like "Here There Everywhere", "Fool on the Hill", "I Will" flourished, though they were overshadowed by Paul's kitschyness in "Rigby", "She's Leaving Home", "Your Mother Should Know", etc.) I once read that the "psychedelic era" was heavily dependent on this album, but not quite in the way you might think. Psychedelic sounds of groups like the Jefferson Airplane and the Strawberry Alarm Clock were influenced by the Beatles middle period (from "Tomorrow Never Knows" and "Love You To" on), in the sense that they tried to emulate those sounds, but the quality of their 1) musicianship, 2) studios, and 3) hallucinogens was not up to the Beatles' level. The result: a terrible imitation, AND a whole new different sound. Sounds like an interesting hypothesis.
messina@ihuxl.UUCP (08/25/83)
The number of tracks in a studio does not have any thing to do with how good it is. The way the studio is laid out, the kind of sound techniques that are used, and the equipment has the most effect on the studio. As far as how many tracks are concerned, a FOUR TRACK recording can sound just as good as 32 track recording. It just takes longer to produce the end result in a FOUR TRACK studio. This is up to the engineer to produce a good result when using four tracks not the studio ( besides I don't even think there was anything more than a 8 track studio back then (?) ). I would hardly call a 4 track studio primative, just hard to use when you have a lot of instruments and a lot of vocals (sort of like using ed and emacs, they both produce the same result, one just takes longer). ihuxl!messina
burris@ihopa.UUCP (08/26/83)
The belief that a product sounding as good from a FOUR track studio as from a THIRTY-TWO track studio is false. In order to lay down as many tracks on a FOUR track, one is required to do MANY more overdubs. Each overdub will increase the noise level 3db. above the noise level of the previous track and will also contribute quite rapidly to frequency response degredation. Overdubs are considered taboo in modern recording technology for these reasons. This, as well as time savings, is why THIRTY-TWO or more track studios were built. The time savings are not trivial when you are doing an album project but the added noise from multiple overdubs can be considered a MAJOR reason for MULTI-TRACK recording. Dave Burris ihopa!burris BTL - Naperville
michaelk@tekmdp.UUCP (Michael Kersenbrock) (09/03/83)
If you build something from four tracks, you get 9 DB LESS noise that if you do it with 32 tracks. Each of the 32 contributes as much noise as each of the four. Of course, it takes more skill to "get it right" with only four tracks for repairs. You sell it with only two tracks. Somehow it is assumed that everybody twenty years ago used their 4-track equipment to emulate the ideal of 32 tracks. Is this the case? If you use only a few tracks (Like folks at Telarc, and some others) you have these strange effects that occur that may be undesired (you get "imaging", OH NO!). Thirty-two track production is one of the "problems" with music recording, although it is perhaps a blessing for commercial low-risk music manufacturing (see back issues of net.audio). I am waiting to purchase a complete set of Beatle albums in CD format (any CD manufacturers listening?).
ez@houxv.UUCP (E.ZYJEWSKI) (08/14/84)
Yes, I've heard the new tune going to work today. IT was a surprise. Quality of sound was that of any other record released by Capitol. It must date from '64 or '65. Great to hear John in his old (singing) form with a song as unfamiliar as this. Hope others aroung the country get a chance to hear it.
Carl Moore (VLD/VMB) <cmoore@BRL-VLD.ARPA> (01/31/85)
One of the recent messages mentioned "Beatles '65 - Beatles VI era". I have just written that the U.S. LPs are repackagings. The songs on those 2 LPs are found mostly on "Beatles for Sale" and to lesser extent on "Help!". British "Help!" had the 7 songs from the movie, plus (on side 2) 3 cuts appearing on "Beatles VI", 2 appearing on (U.S.) "Rubber Soul", and 2 appearing on "Yesterday & Today". (The 3 on UK "Help!" and on Beatles VI are "You Like Me Too Much", "Tell Me What You See", and "Dizzy Miss Lizzie".) Beatles '65 and Beatles VI are not as experimental as UK "Help!". "Revolver" LP was issued when the Beatles were still touring, and is a far cry from what they did on tour. That is hindsight, not what it was seen as when it came out (I wonder about this).