Tell Me :
Talk
there is a lot of truth to this article, and without bashing the beatles, it is fair to say they are overrated, good but overrated.
ahem. alright - who should be rated higher?
If, as yourself and those utterly ridiculous articles claim, the Beatles "success" is merely down to hype, then how come they literally are bigger than God in Russia despite having had their music banned and having been the victim of anti-Beatles propaganda from the governement?
Explain that one for me, Einstein.
Probably so. If anything, they also recorded some Decca masters during that time.
Why, being a "die-hard Stones fan", would that have stopped you listening anyway?
Do you think that it might lessen your Stones-fan credibility?
Go on, live a little, while nobody's looking!
I don't think the Beatles success is owed entirely to hype at all. This is why I wrote I am not bashing them, and acknowledge I like them. I also think they are overrated.
The actually first enetered a studio in '61 to record with Tony Sheridan, the first release to be credited to soley to the beatles was "cry for a shadow" on german polydor. It didnt get released at the time but got released in 64.
my original "7 years" refered to their "proper" career when they signed to EMI.
okay - and you said they were very good at what they did. i agree....but to be overrated, somebody would have to be BETTER at what they did, right? i'm asking you (or anyone) to name someone who did it better.
By stating that they are overrated, you ARE bashing them.
After all, everyone is overrated...if you don't like them very much.
i'll take the first bash at it....what's your position on the beatles again? they're overrated and yet nobody has ever come close? i'm trying to reconcile these two seemingly irreconcilable comments....
Consider theyself bashed.
Witch do you prefer, if you could only buy one set?
well, one set (stereo) is complete, the other isn't...so on balance, i'd go with the stereo.
honestly...it's six of one, half-dozen the other when it comes to the audio merits...
t&a
(aka stonestod)
JumpingKentFlash
i read it 11 more times and i disagree. duke ellington is by all accounts regarded as the best at what he did; as a result, he's rated #1. same goes for the beatles. in baseball, the yankees were regarded as the best team of the 1920's. were they overrated? no. when you're rated the best, and everyone (more or less) agrees with that rating, that's not overrating, that's just regular RATING. sheesh....
Beatle bashing is the easy option. Yes, they were /are commercially successful. Is that a problem or a sin? In my experience those that make a point of bashing the Beatles do so to illustrate their own perceived vision of themselves as some sort of cultural elitist who likes the real deal (insert choice of lesser but supposedly more worthy artists).
The fact is that the Beatles were in the right place at the right time and they had the talent to carve a niche in that era - and retain a place in the rock and roll pantheon for decades to come. You only have to check out the diversity of Beatle cover versions and the range of artits who have done them to realise thay they are a bit more than the composers of 3 minute ditties.
The Beatles did it BEFORE all those others (Robert Johnson excepted) and they achieved it, not only through their incredible talent, but just as importantly, through sheer hard work, slogging for hours on end, night-after-night, year-after-year in sweaty little Hamburg night clubs, and all for a pittance.
It meant that by the time of their first album, they were already experienced, hardened campaigners who had developed a unique style and sound of their own; not one that had been thrust upon them by an over-zealous PR man. It was a style that many others tried to emulate in some form or other, but as soon as they thought they'd caught up, the Beatles had moved up another level with something completely knew.
I read people on this board - including yourself - with their utterly pathetic attempts at de-constructing their music, as if it were somehow easy to compose; each of them overlooking that simple fact in life, which is namely that sheer bloody genius always looks easy.
As a childishly biased Rolling Stones fan, who makes ridiculous, infantile, talibanesque arguments in favour of anything that they do, I would expect you to have a go at the Beatles, simply because of their unparallelled success; all of it acheived over a mere seven/eight year period.
To then cap it all by stating that they are somehow "overrated" however, simply reveals your true colours.
All of them green....with envy.
I think some Stones fans are just stuck in their 1960s playground heyday. I've never met a Beatles fans obsessed with putting the Stones down.
The Beatles will always be just ahead of the Stones for me ... but it's a close run thing.
In the 60's I liked both bands, and I for one have no obsession nor do I even have joy that I rate the Stones as tops, it's just how the music meets me, and I respect your opinion as well.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
MKjan
()
Date: September 9, 2009 20:05
there is a lot of truth to this article, and without bashing the beatles, it is fair to say they are overrated, good but overrated.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
Nanker Phlegm
()
Date: September 9, 2009 20:10
The received wisdom is that the "mono" is the way to hear them, certainly up to and including Pepper. The White Album is more debatable. WHY ? well Stereo was just a niche market still and the same attention wasnt paid to the mixing, often being done some time after the mono's and without any of the Beatles presence who were allways involved in the mono mixing.
Certainly all the studio documentation supports this, and the recollections of those that were there.
you can find more detailed geek type info on this if you just do some googling.
Try and hear them and decide for yourself.
Aside from the "limited" blue box and EPs box set, we have had the Stereo mixes only on CD, so for better or worse the Mono Mix was they way they were intended to be heard. That said this is the first time the "stereo masters have been re-vistited and re-mastered so if thats your thing, than you wont be dissapointed with those either.
Of course the last time I heard some of these in Mono i had a wee dansette type thing with a two bob piece taped to theh arm to stop it jumping, but thats why it would sound better and why many of us were fooled byy the "NEW SOUND EXPERIENCE" of the CD when it first arrived, but thats another rant.
AS for the question about 7" releases, it would allways have been mono, there was no real expectaions of a " stereo audiophile" experience with regard the single back then, they were considered even more dispsable than your "pop" album
Yes it is a piece of cynical marketing, you can only get the mono's if you buy the box, the stereo whic has 3 more albums and extra content costs less. But at lest they have done the darn thing properly, unlike the continual re-releases of the stones catalogue, when the re-sell it to another label.
Oh Pauls feckin bass on Dear Prudence has just knocked me sideways
Certainly all the studio documentation supports this, and the recollections of those that were there.
you can find more detailed geek type info on this if you just do some googling.
Try and hear them and decide for yourself.
Aside from the "limited" blue box and EPs box set, we have had the Stereo mixes only on CD, so for better or worse the Mono Mix was they way they were intended to be heard. That said this is the first time the "stereo masters have been re-vistited and re-mastered so if thats your thing, than you wont be dissapointed with those either.
Of course the last time I heard some of these in Mono i had a wee dansette type thing with a two bob piece taped to theh arm to stop it jumping, but thats why it would sound better and why many of us were fooled byy the "NEW SOUND EXPERIENCE" of the CD when it first arrived, but thats another rant.
AS for the question about 7" releases, it would allways have been mono, there was no real expectaions of a " stereo audiophile" experience with regard the single back then, they were considered even more dispsable than your "pop" album
Yes it is a piece of cynical marketing, you can only get the mono's if you buy the box, the stereo whic has 3 more albums and extra content costs less. But at lest they have done the darn thing properly, unlike the continual re-releases of the stones catalogue, when the re-sell it to another label.
Oh Pauls feckin bass on Dear Prudence has just knocked me sideways
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
T&A
()
Date: September 9, 2009 20:24
Quote
MKjan
there is a lot of truth to this article, and without bashing the beatles, it is fair to say they are overrated, good but overrated.
ahem. alright - who should be rated higher?
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
bassplayer617
()
Date: September 9, 2009 20:36
Bashers aside, there's some YouTube links which feature some of the remastered recordings. I listened to parts of "Revolver" (stereo version), and it is superb.
Like it or not, Beatlemania is alive and well.
Like it or not, Beatlemania is alive and well.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
MKjan
()
Date: September 9, 2009 20:39
It's pretty hard to scrape away all the hype that all bands have, but if you can do that, and not everyone can, your left with just the music and a better chance at a truer opinion. For me, the Stones wrote and performed pure rock'n'roll at a level that is tops, and the Beatles were also very good at what they did...
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
Havo
()
Date: September 9, 2009 20:46
just heard on german TV--very yery good sales of the beatles "remastered" on first day of release. Much more that they exspected,----so I probobly listen to them,even I am a die-hard Stones-Fan
under the boardwalk---down by the sea
under the boardwalk---down by the sea
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
LOGIE
()
Date: September 9, 2009 20:50
Quote
MKjan
It's pretty hard to scrape away all the hype that all bands have, but if you can do that, and not everyone can, your left with just the music and a better chance at a truer opinion. For me, the Stones wrote and performed pure rock'n'roll at a level that is tops, and the Beatles were also very good at what they did...
If, as yourself and those utterly ridiculous articles claim, the Beatles "success" is merely down to hype, then how come they literally are bigger than God in Russia despite having had their music banned and having been the victim of anti-Beatles propaganda from the governement?
Explain that one for me, Einstein.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
kovach
()
Date: September 9, 2009 20:51
Quote
Nanker Phlegm
I think you'll find that the first entered EMI studios in late 62.
Probably so. If anything, they also recorded some Decca masters during that time.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
cirrhosis
()
Date: September 9, 2009 20:52
Why would anyone not like The Beatles?
That's just silly.
That's just silly.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
LOGIE
()
Date: September 9, 2009 20:55
Quote
Havo
just heard on german TV--very yery good sales of the beatles "remastered" on first day of release. Much more that they exspected,----so I probobly listen to them,even I am a die-hard Stones-Fan
Why, being a "die-hard Stones fan", would that have stopped you listening anyway?
Do you think that it might lessen your Stones-fan credibility?
Go on, live a little, while nobody's looking!
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
MKjan
()
Date: September 9, 2009 21:10
Quote
LOGIEQuote
MKjan
It's pretty hard to scrape away all the hype that all bands have, but if you can do that, and not everyone can, your left with just the music and a better chance at a truer opinion. For me, the Stones wrote and performed pure rock'n'roll at a level that is tops, and the Beatles were also very good at what they did...
If, as yourself and those utterly ridiculous articles claim, the Beatles "success" is merely down to hype, then how come they literally are bigger than God in Russia despite having had their music banned and having been the victim of anti-Beatles propaganda from the governement?
Explain that one for me, Einstein.
I don't think the Beatles success is owed entirely to hype at all. This is why I wrote I am not bashing them, and acknowledge I like them. I also think they are overrated.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
Nanker Phlegm
()
Date: September 9, 2009 21:13
Quote
kovachQuote
Nanker Phlegm
I think you'll find that the first entered EMI studios in late 62.
Probably so. If anything, they also recorded some Decca masters during that time.
The actually first enetered a studio in '61 to record with Tony Sheridan, the first release to be credited to soley to the beatles was "cry for a shadow" on german polydor. It didnt get released at the time but got released in 64.
my original "7 years" refered to their "proper" career when they signed to EMI.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
Ross
()
Date: September 9, 2009 21:16
Both the Stereo and Mono box sets were virtualy gone by lunch time here in Atlanta. I ran into the EMI rep at Best Buy, he said there were production issues so a lot fewer Stereo boxes were shipped than planned and it would be a couple of weeks before any more went out!
It would have been nice if they had told the retailers that before they promoted the hell out of it! And Screw Best Buy, they had the stereo box advertised for $199.99, sold the FOUR that they had in stock, and would not issue a raincheck!!
Luckily, there was one of the last of the dying breed of incependent record stores nearby. They were out of the box also, but were selling the independent discs at $9.99 each and giving out 3 nice lithographs with purchases. I don't have the box 7 extra packaging but at least I supported a great little record store!
All of that aside, these discs are just superb!
Ross
It would have been nice if they had told the retailers that before they promoted the hell out of it! And Screw Best Buy, they had the stereo box advertised for $199.99, sold the FOUR that they had in stock, and would not issue a raincheck!!
Luckily, there was one of the last of the dying breed of incependent record stores nearby. They were out of the box also, but were selling the independent discs at $9.99 each and giving out 3 nice lithographs with purchases. I don't have the box 7 extra packaging but at least I supported a great little record store!
All of that aside, these discs are just superb!
Ross
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
T&A
()
Date: September 9, 2009 21:17
Quote
MKjanQuote
LOGIEQuote
MKjan
It's pretty hard to scrape away all the hype that all bands have, but if you can do that, and not everyone can, your left with just the music and a better chance at a truer opinion. For me, the Stones wrote and performed pure rock'n'roll at a level that is tops, and the Beatles were also very good at what they did...
If, as yourself and those utterly ridiculous articles claim, the Beatles "success" is merely down to hype, then how come they literally are bigger than God in Russia despite having had their music banned and having been the victim of anti-Beatles propaganda from the governement?
Explain that one for me, Einstein.
I don't think the Beatles success is owed entirely to hype at all. This is why I wrote I am not bashing them, and acknowledge I like them. I also think they are overrated.
okay - and you said they were very good at what they did. i agree....but to be overrated, somebody would have to be BETTER at what they did, right? i'm asking you (or anyone) to name someone who did it better.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
LOGIE
()
Date: September 9, 2009 21:26
Quote
MKjanQuote
LOGIEQuote
MKjan
It's pretty hard to scrape away all the hype that all bands have, but if you can do that, and not everyone can, your left with just the music and a better chance at a truer opinion. For me, the Stones wrote and performed pure rock'n'roll at a level that is tops, and the Beatles were also very good at what they did...
If, as yourself and those utterly ridiculous articles claim, the Beatles "success" is merely down to hype, then how come they literally are bigger than God in Russia despite having had their music banned and having been the victim of anti-Beatles propaganda from the governement?
Explain that one for me, Einstein.
I don't think the Beatles success is owed entirely to hype at all. This is why I wrote I am not bashing them, and acknowledge I like them. I also think they are overrated.
By stating that they are overrated, you ARE bashing them.
After all, everyone is overrated...if you don't like them very much.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
JumpingKentFlash
()
Date: September 9, 2009 21:52
The Beatles ARE overrated. How can they not be? They're claimed to be the best ever for Christ sakes. That doesn't mean that it's very, very, very good music though. The Beatles are music for the mind with glimpses of music strictly from the heart. The Rolling Stones are the opposite. That's music strictly from the heart with glimpses of music for the mind. Cut down to the bare bones that's really the only two bands you'll ever need, and all the David Bowies, Robert Johnsons, Bruce Springsteens, Grateful Deads, Frank Zappas, ABBAs, Nirvanas and U2s aren't gonna change that 'cause nobody really has enough talent to follow them. We've heard some amazing music through the years, but nobody has ever really come close to The Rolling Stones and The Beatles. And deep in your heart, you know I'm right, even if I'll be bashed for this post.
JumpingKentFlash
JumpingKentFlash
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
T&A
()
Date: September 9, 2009 21:55
Quote
JumpingKentFlash
The Beatles ARE overrated. How can they not be? They're claimed to be the best ever for Christ sakes. That doesn't mean that it's very, very, very good music though. The Beatles are music for the mind with glimpses of music strictly from the heart. The Rolling Stones are the opposite. That's music strictly from the heart with glimpses of music for the mind. Cut down to the bare bones that's really the only two bands you'll ever need, and all the David Bowies, Robert Johnsons, Bruce Springsteens, Grateful Deads, Frank Zappas, ABBAs, Nirvanas and U2s aren't gonna change that 'cause nobody really has enough talent to follow them. We've heard some amazing music through the years, but nobody has ever really come close to The Rolling Stones and The Beatles. And deep in your heart, you know I'm right, even if I'll be bashed for this post.
i'll take the first bash at it....what's your position on the beatles again? they're overrated and yet nobody has ever come close? i'm trying to reconcile these two seemingly irreconcilable comments....
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
bigbang
()
Date: September 9, 2009 22:01
Quote
JumpingKentFlash
The Beatles ARE overrated. How can they not be? They're claimed to be the best ever for Christ sakes. That doesn't mean that it's very, very, very good music though. The Beatles are music for the mind with glimpses of music strictly from the heart. The Rolling Stones are the opposite. That's music strictly from the heart with glimpses of music for the mind. Cut down to the bare bones that's really the only two bands you'll ever need, and all the David Bowies, Robert Johnsons, Bruce Springsteens, Grateful Deads, Frank Zappas, ABBAs, Nirvanas and U2s aren't gonna change that 'cause nobody really has enough talent to follow them. We've heard some amazing music through the years, but nobody has ever really come close to The Rolling Stones and The Beatles. And deep in your heart, you know I'm right, even if I'll be bashed for this post.
Consider theyself bashed.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
rlngstns
()
Date: September 9, 2009 22:04
Quote
StonesTod
already been listening to them - stereo and mono - all weekend - well worth the wait!
Witch do you prefer, if you could only buy one set?
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
T&A
()
Date: September 9, 2009 22:06
Quote
rlngstnsQuote
StonesTod
already been listening to them - stereo and mono - all weekend - well worth the wait!
Witch do you prefer, if you could only buy one set?
well, one set (stereo) is complete, the other isn't...so on balance, i'd go with the stereo.
honestly...it's six of one, half-dozen the other when it comes to the audio merits...
t&a
(aka stonestod)
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
JumpingKentFlash
()
Date: September 9, 2009 22:23
Read it again. It clearly states that it is impossible to not be overrated when people claim it to be the best.Quote
T&AQuote
JumpingKentFlash
The Beatles ARE overrated. How can they not be? They're claimed to be the best ever for Christ sakes. That doesn't mean that it's very, very, very good music though. The Beatles are music for the mind with glimpses of music strictly from the heart. The Rolling Stones are the opposite. That's music strictly from the heart with glimpses of music for the mind. Cut down to the bare bones that's really the only two bands you'll ever need, and all the David Bowies, Robert Johnsons, Bruce Springsteens, Grateful Deads, Frank Zappas, ABBAs, Nirvanas and U2s aren't gonna change that 'cause nobody really has enough talent to follow them. We've heard some amazing music through the years, but nobody has ever really come close to The Rolling Stones and The Beatles. And deep in your heart, you know I'm right, even if I'll be bashed for this post.
i'll take the first bash at it....what's your position on the beatles again? they're overrated and yet nobody has ever come close? i'm trying to reconcile these two seemingly irreconcilable comments....
JumpingKentFlash
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
rlngstns
()
Date: September 9, 2009 22:29
Quote
T&AQuote
rlngstnsQuote
StonesTod
already been listening to them - stereo and mono - all weekend - well worth the wait!
Witch do you prefer, if you could only buy one set?
well, one set (stereo) is complete, the other isn't...so on balance, i'd go with the stereo.
honestly...it's six of one, half-dozen the other when it comes to the audio merits...
t&a
thanks for that.....reading the past posts, just to narrow it down....
(aka stonestod)
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
T&A
()
Date: September 9, 2009 22:32
Quote
JumpingKentFlashRead it again. It clearly states that it is impossible to not be overrated when people claim it to be the best.Quote
T&AQuote
JumpingKentFlash
The Beatles ARE overrated. How can they not be? They're claimed to be the best ever for Christ sakes. That doesn't mean that it's very, very, very good music though. The Beatles are music for the mind with glimpses of music strictly from the heart. The Rolling Stones are the opposite. That's music strictly from the heart with glimpses of music for the mind. Cut down to the bare bones that's really the only two bands you'll ever need, and all the David Bowies, Robert Johnsons, Bruce Springsteens, Grateful Deads, Frank Zappas, ABBAs, Nirvanas and U2s aren't gonna change that 'cause nobody really has enough talent to follow them. We've heard some amazing music through the years, but nobody has ever really come close to The Rolling Stones and The Beatles. And deep in your heart, you know I'm right, even if I'll be bashed for this post.
i'll take the first bash at it....what's your position on the beatles again? they're overrated and yet nobody has ever come close? i'm trying to reconcile these two seemingly irreconcilable comments....
i read it 11 more times and i disagree. duke ellington is by all accounts regarded as the best at what he did; as a result, he's rated #1. same goes for the beatles. in baseball, the yankees were regarded as the best team of the 1920's. were they overrated? no. when you're rated the best, and everyone (more or less) agrees with that rating, that's not overrating, that's just regular RATING. sheesh....
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
Baxter Thwaites
()
Date: September 9, 2009 22:34
Beatle bashing is the easy option. Yes, they were /are commercially successful. Is that a problem or a sin? In my experience those that make a point of bashing the Beatles do so to illustrate their own perceived vision of themselves as some sort of cultural elitist who likes the real deal (insert choice of lesser but supposedly more worthy artists).
The fact is that the Beatles were in the right place at the right time and they had the talent to carve a niche in that era - and retain a place in the rock and roll pantheon for decades to come. You only have to check out the diversity of Beatle cover versions and the range of artits who have done them to realise thay they are a bit more than the composers of 3 minute ditties.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
filstan
()
Date: September 9, 2009 23:20
Went to 3 stores today. All Mono boxed sets gone early this morning in minutes. I can wait til they get more out, but it would have been nice. Bought the stereo White Album though and it sounds lush and full.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
LOGIE
()
Date: September 9, 2009 23:55
Quote
JumpingKentFlash
The Beatles ARE overrated. How can they not be? They're claimed to be the best ever for Christ sakes. That doesn't mean that it's very, very, very good music though. The Beatles are music for the mind with glimpses of music strictly from the heart. The Rolling Stones are the opposite. That's music strictly from the heart with glimpses of music for the mind. Cut down to the bare bones that's really the only two bands you'll ever need, and all the David Bowies, Robert Johnsons, Bruce Springsteens, Grateful Deads, Frank Zappas, ABBAs, Nirvanas and U2s aren't gonna change that 'cause nobody really has enough talent to follow them. We've heard some amazing music through the years, but nobody has ever really come close to The Rolling Stones and The Beatles. And deep in your heart, you know I'm right, even if I'll be bashed for this post.
The Beatles did it BEFORE all those others (Robert Johnson excepted) and they achieved it, not only through their incredible talent, but just as importantly, through sheer hard work, slogging for hours on end, night-after-night, year-after-year in sweaty little Hamburg night clubs, and all for a pittance.
It meant that by the time of their first album, they were already experienced, hardened campaigners who had developed a unique style and sound of their own; not one that had been thrust upon them by an over-zealous PR man. It was a style that many others tried to emulate in some form or other, but as soon as they thought they'd caught up, the Beatles had moved up another level with something completely knew.
I read people on this board - including yourself - with their utterly pathetic attempts at de-constructing their music, as if it were somehow easy to compose; each of them overlooking that simple fact in life, which is namely that sheer bloody genius always looks easy.
As a childishly biased Rolling Stones fan, who makes ridiculous, infantile, talibanesque arguments in favour of anything that they do, I would expect you to have a go at the Beatles, simply because of their unparallelled success; all of it acheived over a mere seven/eight year period.
To then cap it all by stating that they are somehow "overrated" however, simply reveals your true colours.
All of them green....with envy.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
MKjan
()
Date: September 10, 2009 00:04
It seems the Beatle fanatics can't accept that other people have other opinions. To say they are overrated is not a bashing,it is an honest appraisal. It's bashing if I don't like them as much as you??
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
georgelicks
()
Date: September 10, 2009 00:19
Beatles boost the CD
Fab Four set to prompt surge in CD sales with re-mastered back catalogue
09 September 2009 - The music industry is on track for a boost to the declining market of the CD, which has seen drop of 31.1% in the US since 2007.
More than 45 years after Beatlemania first struck, five million re-mastered CDs by the seminal pop band have been shipped to retailers.
Priced at $269, 50,000 box sets of mono versions of The Beatles recordings have already sold out.
As reported by the Financial Times, pre-sales show today's re-release of all 14 UK albums in their back catalogue should be the "biggest catalogue reissue ever conducted in the history of the music business", said Ernesto Schmitt, the head of EMI's global catalogue.
By midday yesterday (8 September) sales dominated seven of the top ten positions of the US music chart on Amazon.com.
[www.bbc.co.uk]
Fab Four set to prompt surge in CD sales with re-mastered back catalogue
09 September 2009 - The music industry is on track for a boost to the declining market of the CD, which has seen drop of 31.1% in the US since 2007.
More than 45 years after Beatlemania first struck, five million re-mastered CDs by the seminal pop band have been shipped to retailers.
Priced at $269, 50,000 box sets of mono versions of The Beatles recordings have already sold out.
As reported by the Financial Times, pre-sales show today's re-release of all 14 UK albums in their back catalogue should be the "biggest catalogue reissue ever conducted in the history of the music business", said Ernesto Schmitt, the head of EMI's global catalogue.
By midday yesterday (8 September) sales dominated seven of the top ten positions of the US music chart on Amazon.com.
[www.bbc.co.uk]
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
Baxter Thwaites
()
Date: September 10, 2009 00:22
Quote
MKjan
It seems the Beatle fanatics can't accept that other people have other opinions. To say they are overrated is not a bashing,it is an honest appraisal. It's bashing if I don't like them as much as you??
I think some Stones fans are just stuck in their 1960s playground heyday. I've never met a Beatles fans obsessed with putting the Stones down.
The Beatles will always be just ahead of the Stones for me ... but it's a close run thing.
Re: OT: 09-09-09; The Beatles Are Coming!
Posted by:
MKjan
()
Date: September 10, 2009 00:32
Quote
Baxter ThwaitesQuote
MKjan
It seems the Beatle fanatics can't accept that other people have other opinions. To say they are overrated is not a bashing,it is an honest appraisal. It's bashing if I don't like them as much as you??
I think some Stones fans are just stuck in their 1960s playground heyday. I've never met a Beatles fans obsessed with putting the Stones down.
The Beatles will always be just ahead of the Stones for me ... but it's a close run thing.
In the 60's I liked both bands, and I for one have no obsession nor do I even have joy that I rate the Stones as tops, it's just how the music meets me, and I respect your opinion as well.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
5strings , andrea72 , DandelionPowderman , django , fanch , gimme_shelter , IsakSun , MadMetaphoricalMax , novica , PaintitBlue , RisingStone , sheldi , StonedRambler , superglen , walkingthedog
Guests:
1869
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10