Hello My Stonesian Kin .............................

Picked up one of the Beatles Remasters at Barnes & Noble ........ " A Hard Day's Night  "  .


I realize that " Rubber Soul " and " The White Album " feature John Lennon at his best but I had forgotten just how marvelous the harmonies are on this disc .

Recommended listening as this was the period when John was driving the band .

" Hit Me Ronnie "

J Fly .

Curious:
Joey,
I grew up listening to my older cousins original Beatles albums (Meet the Beatles, Beatles 65 and A Hard Day's Night)....
Is it mono for you or stereo?
I like the mono stuff: those rhythm guitars, harmonies etc.. just sound so big
In stereo, i lose something.
I know the mono is avaliable on one of the box sets...

Joey wrote on Jan 13^th, 2010 at 9:49pm:

Hello My Stonesian Kin ............................. Picked up one of the Beatles Remasters at Barnes & Noble ........ " A Hard Day's Night  "  . I realize that " Rubber Soul " and " The White Album " feature John Lennon at his best but I had forgotten just how marvelous the harmonies are on this disc . Recommended listening as this was the period when John was driving the band . " Hit Me Ronnie " J Fly .

Lennon was hardly "driving" the band while recording the White Album..

Ronnie Richards wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 4:48am:

Joey wrote on Jan 13th, 2010 at 9:49pm: Hello My Stonesian Kin ............................. Picked up one of the Beatles Remasters at Barnes & Noble ........ " A Hard Day's Night  "  . I realize that " Rubber Soul " and " The White Album " feature John Lennon at his best but I had forgotten just how marvelous the harmonies are on this disc . Recommended listening as this was the period when John was driving the band . " Hit Me Ronnie " J Fly . Lennon was hardly "driving" the band while recording the White Album..

As soon as Yoko Ono came into his life, his interest in The Beatles was zilch, & she came into his life around that time they were recording The White Album.

Yeah I got some of the Beatle's remasters: A Hard Days Night, Abbey Road, Sgt Peppers and Magical Mystery Tour. Listening to the remasters transports me back in time, way back to a time when life was simple. The remasters are good! I want to get more but first I should get more of the Stones remasters! Those are good too, but I cant notice much difference except the drums are louder in the remasters. What else did you notice that was different on the remasters from the originals?  

I have the Mono and the Stereo box sets. I haven't gotten to the Mono box yet, but the Stereo is a thing of beauty. There are all kinds of things I'm hearing for the first time. The music sounds much better than the 1987 discs.

Steel Wheels wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 6:35am:

I have the Mono and the Stereo box sets. I haven't gotten to the Mono box yet, but the Stereo is a thing of beauty. There are all kinds of things I'm hearing for the first time. The music sounds much better than the 1987 discs.

I hear so much more... it is wide open on my system, plays well loud, not compressed and def. not mastered in a way that the music isn't seperated ie: loud mastering. I don't need the shit boosted up so it's sounds like white noise, I have a volume knob for that... these remasters were done very well...

Didnt buy 'em in the end due to the cost and the fact I couldnt choose between both sets, so I downloaded them (in lossless format) from demonoid.

Even though my ears aren't what they were 10-20 years ago, its quite apparent that they're absolutely wonderful. Have to say I actually prefer the mono releases, because for most of the Beatles' career, thats the way that were recorded (the White Album was the first new release to be issued in stereo, and that was only in the US)

I've honestly no interest in the Stones remasters. I've bought some of these albums about four times already and without bonus tracks or some significant sonic improvement, I won't be doing so again. I've listened to them on Spotify and that'll suffice.

Agreed, these Beatles remasters sound amazing (I could even hear the difference on the radio when the previewed them in advance of the CD releases)...as good as my 1987 CDs have been to me over the last 20 years, this box set has replaced them...

THAT'S how you do remasters, Stones!

" Lennon was hardly "driving" the band while recording the White Album..  "

Concur .

I was referring to the 1964 - 1966 time period before John ' acquiesced ' leadership of the band to MACCA .

I remain ..................... FOREVER !!!!!! ............ your ' kins .


Joeykins , Est. 1999 and loved by Everybody

StonesFanatic wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 10:01am:

Agreed, these Beatles remasters sound amazing (I could even hear the difference on the radio when the previewed them in advance of the CD releases)...as good as my 1987 CDs have been to me over the last 20 years, this box set has replaced them... THAT'S how you do remasters, Stones!

In fairness, the Stones albums were last remastered in 1994, and Virgin did a very good job of them. There isn't much room for improvement sound-wise.

The Beatles albums haven't been remastered since they first appeared on CD in, what, 1988? And the originals sounded quite crappy. There was a huge jump in technology even between '88 and '94 (the difference between the Stones CBS reissues and their Virgin equivalents in '94 was like night and day)

Universal were pretty justified in reissuing the Stones albums for the simple reason that Virgin/EMI deleted their back catalogue when the band left the label last year and therefore it was essential that the albums had to be in the shops - however, as they're the third label to have issued the band's post-ABKCO albums on CD in the last 22 years or so, it's going to take a bit of effort to entice people to buy these releases considering the EMI albums have been out there for ages already and sound fine as they are.

The sales for the Stones remasters have been absolutely horrific, incidentally. I think the first batch of four sold something like 7,000 between them in the first three months. Time was when a home video of Keith cutting his toenails could have shifted more copies than that.

Universal must be wondering what they've taken on. At least the Stones didn't get a huge advance this time.

"  Time was when a home video of Keith cutting
his toenails could have shifted more copies than that.  "

< -------- Christ , that is postin' on loan from GOD right there !!!

Gazza wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 10:57am:

StonesFanatic wrote on Jan 14th, 2010 at 10:01am: Agreed, these Beatles remasters sound amazing (I could even hear the difference on the radio when the previewed them in advance of the CD releases)...as good as my 1987 CDs have been to me over the last 20 years, this box set has replaced them... THAT'S how you do remasters, Stones! In fairness, the Stones albums were last remastered in 1994, and Virgin did a very good job of them. There isn't much room for improvement sound-wise. The Beatles albums haven't been remastered since they first appeared on CD in, what, 1988? And the originals sounded quite crappy. There was a huge jump in technology even between '88 and '94 (the difference between the Stones CBS reissues and their Virgin equivalents in '94 was like night and day) Universal were pretty justified in reissuing the Stones albums for the simple reason that Virgin/EMI deleted their back catalogue when the band left the label last year and therefore it was essential that the albums had to be in the shops - however, as they're the third label to have issued the band's post-ABKCO albums on CD in the last 22 years or so, it's going to take a bit of effort to entice people to buy these releases considering the EMI albums have been out there for ages already and sound fine as they are. The sales for the Stones remasters have been absolutely horrific, incidentally. I think the first batch of four sold something like 7,000 between them in the first three months. Time was when a home video of Keith cutting his toenails could have shifted more copies than that. Universal must be wondering what they've taken on. At least the Stones didn't get a huge advance this time.

Good points Gazza.  I should have clarified, the 1994 Stones remasters are very good...that's how I have all of my Stones on CD.  You're right, there is no reason why anyone who has them would or should buy the new Universal ones...unless they had bonus material, which they don't...

I purchased the Beatles stereo box set. I've only listened to a few discs, but they sound amazing.

Haven't budged towards the Stones "remasters". No real point if there aren't any extras. At one point I was interested in IORR, just to see if some of the muffled sound was glossed. Virgins will do for me.

I'd like to go back to Gazza mentioning the horrible sales of these remasters...what can we factor this down to? Illegal downloading or just an uncanny disinterest in the Stones (or maybe people just have them already and aren't buying them...kind of like me)? I got into the Stones when I was around 17 or 18 years of age. I went out and I bought all of the cds that were in store that I could find. I bought all of the good, decent vinyl I could...and you know what, I was like the only person I knew (except for a few college colleagues) that even liked the Stones. The Stones may seem to saturate the market, but realistically I think they're music is very UNDERRATED. A select few of their songs are played to death on radio, but Zeppelin, Sabbath, AC/DC--these are the classic bands the young ones are gunning for. The "classic rock" bands that get airplay on the rock stations that play more of a modern heavier rock. I don't really think the Stones are lumped into that--as far as I know they are usually on classic rock stations (or "oldies").

Honestly, I think illegal downloading may be the big factor here. But I also believe the Stones don't appeal to some. That's fine by me. I just have the belief that the person has to find the Stones, not the other way around. I found them. And I'm proud of that!

But the Beatles box sets, which are $200+, have been selling like crazy over the Stones remasters...so I don't think illegal downloading is the culprit here...

" ...  belief that the person has to find the Stones,
not the other way around. I found them. And I'm proud of that ! "

Boomy ......................................


You are much loved by Joey


Joeykins ( He only knows how to love ) .

Boomy wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 11:58am:

I purchased the Beatles stereo box set. I've only listened to a few discs, but they sound amazing. Haven't budged towards the Stones "remasters". No real point if there aren't any extras. At one point I was interested in IORR, just to see if some of the muffled sound was glossed. Virgins will do for me. I'd like to go back to Gazza mentioning the horrible sales of these remasters...what can we factor this down to? Illegal downloading or just an uncanny disinterest in the Stones (or maybe people just have them already and aren't buying them...kind of like me)? I got into the Stones when I was around 17 or 18 years of age. I went out and I bought all of the cds that were in store that I could find. I bought all of the good, decent vinyl I could...and you know what, I was like the only person I knew (except for a few college colleagues) that even liked the Stones. The Stones may seem to saturate the market, but realistically I think they're music is very UNDERRATED. A select few of their songs are played to death on radio, but Zeppelin, Sabbath, AC/DC--these are the classic bands the young ones are gunning for. The "classic rock" bands that get airplay on the rock stations that play more of a modern heavier rock. I don't really think the Stones are lumped into that--as far as I know they are usually on classic rock stations (or "oldies"). Honestly, I think illegal downloading may be the big factor here. But I also believe the Stones don't appeal to some. That's fine by me. I just have the belief that the person has to find the Stones, not the other way around. I found them. And I'm proud of that!

Downloading is killing sales, there's no question about that.

However, important factors are mediocre marketing and the fact that pretty much everyone by now who wants to buy a Stones CD has had ample opportunity to do so - so this isn't going to entice anyone but completists. Marketing hasnt done the Beatles' sales any harm - the sales for these remasters immediately exceeded demand and new copies had to be pressed. Their '1' album - released in 2000 - was also the biggest selling album of the last decade (over 30 million). Not bad for a collection of songs that were 30-40 years old and released several times before.

Its also a knock-on effect of the Stones' own greed in the concert market. They've all but cut off new ticket buyers because their prices are too prohibitive - the upshot of that is that a potential generation of fans are not only excluded from their shows, but aren't going to bother discovering their recorded music either.

Doubt the Stones' braintrust are that bothered. As long as sales of bobble headed dolls are OK, they'll be happy enough with that as their legacy.

" However, important factors are mediocre marketing and the fact that pretty much everyone by now who wants to buy a Stones CD has had ample opportunity to do so - so this isn't going to entice anyone but completists. Marketing hasnt done the Beatles' sales any harm - the sales for these remasters immediately exceeded demand and new copies had to be pressed. Their '1' album - released in 2000 - was also the biggest selling album of the last decade (over 30 million). Not bad for a collection of songs that were 30-40 years old and released several times before.

Its also a knock-on effect of the Stones' own greed in the concert market. They've all but cut off new ticket buyers because their prices are too prohibitive - the upshot of that is that a potential generation of fans are not only excluded from their shows, but aren't going to bother discovering their recorded music either.  "


I really ,  REALLY miss John Lennon !!!!!!!!!


Shot in the BACK !!!!!!  ... Four Friggin TIMES  !!!!!  ... right in front of his apartment . Why ?!

*** WHY ?! ****




Joey Lennon ™

At my local Best Buy there is no longer even a slot for Rolling Stones cds nor are there any in the store.

2000monkey wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 10:43pm:

At my local Best Buy there is no longer even a slot for Rolling Stones cds nor are there any in the store.

I hate when that happens, No Stones Slot. I've had that happen it seems quite alot in my Life. No Stones Slot now, Shit.  :blankfriggingstare1
Jerry Lee Slot Was my first Disappointment at the Woolworths

---

Don't kid yourselves, the Stones recordings could sound better than what Virgin released 16 years ago.  Even a lone wolf like mickboy got a better sound on some of what he's remastered.  Just listen to Angie on "Dancing so Free".  To my ears nothing touches mickboy's "lossy" version.  I've also heard needledrops of other lp's that are stronger to my ears than the Virgins.  

Mickboy's stuff is generally pretty good and maybe another reason for not buying the Universal remasters.

His upgrade of Goats Head Soup was absolutely the best of the lot - partly because the mix of the original album was so mediocre. I heard the album with new ears after listening to 'Dancing so Free'.

Overall, do you think the Universal remasters are any better than his efforts, though?

No.  I agree with much of what has been said on the Universal "remasters".  

Funny how you don't see long, in depth interviews with the engineers who remastered the Stones catalog, like you did with the Beatles.  Surely the Stones deserve the same level of care in the remastering process.  I guess level of care is determined by projected level of sales.  

Then again how does a band notorious for their "fuck you" attitude allow Universal to release the edited version of Starfucker?  Are they even paying attention these days?  

Some day these recordings will be treated with the respect they deserve.

eric wrote on Jan 15^th, 2010 at 7:25am:

No.  I agree with much of what has been said on the Universal "remasters".   Funny how you don't see long, in depth interviews with the engineers who remastered the Stones catalog, like you did with the Beatles.  Surely the Stones deserve the same level of care in the remastering process.  I guess level of care is determined by projected level of sales.   Then again how does a band notorious for their "fuck you" attitude allow Universal to release the edited version of Starfucker?  Are they even paying attention these days?   Some day these recordings will be treated with the respect they deserve.

Agree on all of that. That said, if the Stones albums hadnt been remastered since the time CBS first released them on CD in the mid 80s, I think much more of a fuss would have been made. When it comes to marketing their recorded work, the difference in both acts is like night and day - which is even more galling when you consider the Beatles haven't made a proper record in four decades.

A band that used to take out full page ads urging fans not to buy 'inferior' Decca product in the early 70s has now transformed into a band who in the last five years has a) authorised the release of a live album that none of them could be bothered to listen to in advance (as evidenced by the fuck up on Live Licks, a flaw noticed by EVERYONE who heard it and which is STILL uncorrected on re-pressings),  b) allowed guitar technicians to overdub parts of a live DVD (see the credits of 'Biggest Bang' and c) appear to have abdicated all artistic control over the abomination that was 'Rarities' (ie, half the songs chosen weren't rarities at all and the sleevenotes were thrown together by an incompetent idiot).

The quality control department at Stones HQ appears to have committed a mass hari-kiri in the last few years.

Good point guys about Mickboy. Wonder what he'd do with the original master tapes?

Here's the thing, though, much as we love the Stones (and I should add I'm a huge Beatles fan, too), when people think of the Beatles, they think of innovation and all the great sounds they got, in addition to their amazing songwriting.  When people think of the Stones, they think of kick-ass music.

My point is, The Beatles were innovators, the Stones were/are a great/legendary rock band...but that's it.  Not to take anything away from them at all, of course not, but it makes sense why there is no clamor for remasters, to talk to anyone who produced/engineered them, etc...because who cares? It's more interesting to hear about how artificial double-tracking and recording Sgt Pepper on *4-track* vs how Keith got a certain sound out of his amp, you know?

StonesFanatic wrote on Jan 15^th, 2010 at 11:18am:

Here's the thing, though, much as we love the Stones (and I should add I'm a huge Beatles fan, too), when people think of the Beatles, they think of innovation and all the great sounds they got, in addition to their amazing songwriting.  When people think of the Stones, they think of kick-ass music. My point is, The Beatles were innovators, the Stones were/are a great/legendary rock band...but that's it.  Not to take anything away from them at all, of course not, but it makes sense why there is no clamor for remasters, to talk to anyone who produced/engineered them, etc...because who cares? It's more interesting to hear about how artificial double-tracking and recording Sgt Pepper on *4-track* vs how Keith got a certain sound out of his amp, you know?

I know what you're saying SF, The Beatles appeal to everybody from little kids to Grandmothers, they got a far more wider audience, I know people who don't like Rock & Roll but they do like the songs The Beatles wrote & recorded, George Martin helped them a lot in the sense of including classical music instruments, like say Penny Lane, I often heard from people that they thought The Stones was like a good bar band but The Beatles were better in the studio, that's just what I gathered from people over the years that are not bias to The Stones.

Joey wrote on Jan 14^th, 2010 at 10:43am:

" Lennon was hardly "driving" the band while recording the White Album..  " Concur . I was referring to the 1964 - 1966 time period before John ' acquiesced ' leadership of the band to MACCA . I remain ..................... FOREVER !!!!!! ............ your ' kins . Joeykins , Est. 1999 and loved by Everybody

Young Joey!

I took your post to mean that Lennon was "driving"
the band during "HDN", but that the White Album
(among others) featured him at his best. I would
have to agree! The White Album, in fact, features
him at his best (Dear Prudence, Happiness Is A Warm
Gun, Everybody's Got Something To Hide) AND worst
(Revolution #9)!

I've been buying the Beatles remasters one at a time.
They are indeed sonically scrumptious! AND more popular
than ME!

http://online.wsj.com/media/johnlennondatebook_E_20090902110042.jpg

" Young Joey!

I took your post to mean that Lennon was "driving"
the band during "HDN", but that the White Album
(among others) featured him at his best. I would
have to agree! The White Album, in fact, features
him at his best (Dear Prudence, Happiness Is A Warm
Gun, Everybody's Got Something To Hide) AND worst
(Revolution #9)!

I've been buying the Beatles remasters one at a time.
They are indeed sonically scrumptious! AND more popular
than ME! "

Jesus .................... I love you !!!!!!


Actually , listen to Revolution # 9 in the dark and then thank me later .

" Hit Me Ronnie ! "







Joey Prejean ! ™

I have both the mono AND stereo remasters boxes...they are by far THE best remastering job ever done on a group's catalog!:) I made a startling discovery when I first started playing them on my blu-ray player...the sound on the blu-ray reminds me of my old turntable from the '60's...rich, full sound...! My only regret is they didn't release them in blu-ray audio like Neil Young and Tom Petty have done with their latest anthology's!:)

Paul Macca had canceled his gig in San Siro, Milan,  the next Jun, for his farewell tour because he'd refused the limit of the 78 decibel that the Govern Hall had decided for all the shows there in the Stadium.
Maybe Mac will plays in Neaples or Verona's Arena. ei: there isnt no limit for the decibel.

"  The Beatles were innovators, the Stones were/are a great/legendary rock band...but that's it.  Not to take anything away from them at all, of course not, but it makes sense why there is no clamor for remasters, to talk to anyone who produced/engineered them, etc...because who cares? It's more interesting to hear about how artificial double-tracking and recording Sgt Pepper on *4-track* vs how Keith got a certain sound out of his amp ... "


Great Post !!!!!

Key word "artificial".  What exactly is the Beatle sound innovation if not artifice.  Take a good listen to the Let it Be sessions before the fairy dust was applied.

I for one find it much more interesting reading about Keith's amp selection than George Martin and his team of engineers coming up with sounds the Beatles could never reproduce on stage.

" Key word "artificial".  What exactly is the Beatle sound innovation if not artifice.  Take a good listen to the Let it Be sessions before the fairy dust was applied.

I for one find it much more interesting reading about Keith's amp selection than George Martin and his team of engineers coming up with sounds the Beatles could never reproduce on stage.  "


You raise a salient and very interesting point there my Stonesian Brother .

" Hit Me Ronnie ! "

J'Lo

eric wrote on Jan 17^th, 2010 at 6:18pm:

Key word "artificial".  What exactly is the Beatle sound innovation if not artifice.  Take a good listen to the Let it Be sessions before the fairy dust was applied. I for one find it much more interesting reading about Keith's amp selection than George Martin and his team of engineers coming up with sounds the Beatles could never reproduce on stage.

But wait, what was artificial? Do you mean since the 4 Beatles didn't play the instruments?

It's really a no win argument, Stones versus Beatles. It's just a preference.
It's like saying pizza is soooo much better than spaghetti. To who, right.

If I had to choose between the two, I would have to go with The Beatles collection.
But day to day, I listen to the Stones much more often . . .

eric wrote on Jan 17^th, 2010 at 6:18pm:

Key word "artificial".  What exactly is the Beatle sound innovation if not artifice.  Take a good listen to the Let it Be sessions before the fairy dust was applied. I for one find it much more interesting reading about Keith's amp selection than George Martin and his team of engineers coming up with sounds the Beatles could never reproduce on stage.

'George Martin and his team of engineers....'
and oh yeah, the great lyrics, melodies, chord progressions, creating something completely new....
that came from John, Paul, George and Ringo.
I never understood the Stones VS Beatles thing....
there is no comparison - they both created something unique and all their own....
My nine-year old niece has become obsessed with the Beatles....
she may not be ready for the Stones yet, but until then, she will discover something as brilliant - albeit in a different way.

" My nine-year old niece has become obsessed with the Beatles....
she may not be ready for the Stones yet, but until then, she will discover something as brilliant - albeit in a different way. "

You Are Both Much Loved by The Joey .

Joey Lennon

Joey wrote on Jan 19^th, 2010 at 3:22pm:

" My nine-year old niece has become obsessed with the Beatles.... she may not be ready for the Stones yet, but until then, she will discover something as brilliant - albeit in a different way. " You Are Both Much Loved by The Joey . Joey Lennon

As you can imagine, I am proud -
this is new for her and this weekend, i she picked out something called Bealtleology.....and she begged me to buy her Help..
She settled on watching my copy of A Hard Day's Night again... i caught her the next morning watching it again on her cousin's mini dvd player....
So far, I've supplied her with cds.... the "red album", the "number ones", and "hard days"..
She's at that point where she's distinguishing the differences between John, Paul, George and Ringo, something i remember me and my cousins doing as kids....
Just so proud....

"  As you can imagine, I am proud -
this is new for her and this weekend, i she picked out something called Bealtleology.....and she begged me to buy her Help..
She settled on watching my copy of A Hard Day's Night again... i caught her the next morning watching it again on her cousin's mini dvd player....
So far, I've supplied her with cds.... the "red album", the "number ones", and "hard days"..
She's at that point where she's distinguishing the differences between John, Paul, George and Ringo, something i remember me and my cousins doing as kids....
Just so proud ... "


Oh THAT is beautiful !!!!!   ...... Proud INDEED !!!!!  ..... already distinguishing the differences between the Fab Four ( Heck  ,  I could not do that until I was twenty )  .

She will be a Future President of the United States In My Honest Opinion .... I love this story .


Joey Lennon