Scattered Blog

Playlist: Perfect Beatles Songs

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Sun, 27 Aug 2017 22:38:00 -0400

Recently the hard drive on my iPod Classic died, so I replaced it with a hack that allows you to use an SD card. Advantage: your iPod capacity is now limited to the highest-capacity compatible SD card (in my case, 200 gigabytes) instead of the hard-set limit that Apple provided. (Disadvantage: the spring action that releases the SD card is very sensitive, so I drop my iPod, I have to pry it open and put the card back in the slot.)

This was about a year after I replaced my original MacBook, not realizing that for some reason my playlists didn't get backed up, so I have to re-create my playlists, including my "Perfect Beatles Songs" playlist. Unfortunately, I had no documentation of it, so I had to carefully take plenty of time to consider what songs deserve to be added. My wife and I often discuss what a perfect Beatles song is. I can't say there's a hard set definition, but perhaps an explanation of why each song made the list is in order. Here's the playlist:

Twist and Shout (source: stereo Please Please Me, 2009 edition) - Yes, I actually prefer the stereo mixes of the early albums, if for no other reason they sound brighter than the mono mixes. How can one not include "Twist and Shout" on a list of perfect Beatles songs? It's a cover, but one that blows the original out of the park. Some people prefer The Isley Brothers' version, but I don't understand how; it sounds clunky, and personally, that weird horn solo makes me think of The Three Stooges. Some argue that The Beatles were actually re-making The Top Notes' version, but I somehow doubt it. Regardless, one cannot deny the power of The Beatles' version, nailed in one take (a second complete take being recorded but not holding a candle to the first), and eventually becoming a standard concert opener.
She's a Woman (source: Past Masters, 2009 edition) - "She's a Woman," as a single side, represents the classic duality of Lennon and McCartney. Musically, if not lyrically, it has the same thing to say as its flip-side "I Feel Fine." A great second-song selection in concert, it also deserves a second-position place on this playlist. I chose a British version, as the Capitol-made remixes done by command of Dave Dexter sound like the song was recorded in a tin can in an abandoned subway tunnel.
Dear Prudence (source: Rock Band) - Despite its "There's no Santa!" quality of the killer drumming at the end being performed not by Ringo but by Paul, you can't deny: "Dear Prudence" is a Damn Fine Song. John obviously wanted to show off the fingerpicking he had just learned from Donovan back in India, and the hypnotic fingerpicking pattern provides a nice backdrop for a melody that doesn't really have all that many notes in it -- a typical Lennon habit (cf. "Help!," "Julia"). If I'm not mistaken, technically what you hear on the "white" album is Take 1. I don't have my Lewisohn book in close proximity as I type this, but I do believe that in 1968 EMI had acquired an 8-track deck, and with so many tracks to work with, at first if the Fabs messed up, they'd simply go back and wipe out the track with the mistake and re-record the one track. Yeah, I know, takes don't really work that way, but...it keeps the take count down. I sourced the song for this playlist from the Rock Band game, specifically from a stereo mixdown done by Paolo Castillo, because right now, this is the only way to get a version of "Dear Prudence" with a clean intro.
Something (source: 1+) - George Harrison perfection; it doesn't get any better than this. "There's no Santa Claus" realization: apparently George didn't like the killer bass line and wanted something much simpler. I often consider doing a crossfade mix going from the final orchestral strains of "The End" straight into "Something:" it could work very well.
Norwegian Wood (This Bird Has Flown) (source: Rubber Soul, original 1965 stereo mix from the 2009 box set The Beatles In Mono) - If there was one and only one Beatles song that could be described as "perfect," "Norwegian Wood" would have to be it. I'm not saying it's necessarily my favorite Beatles song; indeed, to ask a fan "What's your favorite Beatles song?" would be akin The overall sound of the song says, "The Beatles are changing and making the world change, so listen up." I can even hear the narrator (FM deejay voice) over a (nonexistent, I take it?) promo advertising Rubber Soul, over the acoustic guitar intro: "There's a new sound from the Fab Four. Sit down, put a buzz on, and dig it." The song has everything: a refrain, verses, two bridges, an instrumental break, an exotic new instrument, a complete story, the classic songwriting team of Lennon-McCartney (although I suspect extremely light on the McCartney), and vocal harmonies...all in two minutes. Two minutes.
Ticket To Ride (source: Help!, mono version, 2009 edition) - I need to do further research into this, but I think that the instruments were tuned down the day that this song was recorded. Why else would this (and "I Need You," recorded on the same day) be in A-flat instead of A? (Supporting evidence: The Beatles always played the song in A in concerts and TV and radio appearances.) But whatever. Something about the song...nobody else's songs had this kind of vibe before. Interestingly, many people consider "Ticket To Ride" to be the song that led to the creation of heavy metal and headbanging, and I can't really dispute that; it's totally plausible. Is the song particularly loud or headbangy? Not at all, but still, it can work. I chose the mono mix about 75% because it has a better balance than the stereo versions, and about 25% in tribute to the Capitol single release, which 1) said that this (and, inexplicably, its B-side "Yes It Is") was in the movie Eight Arms To Hold You (and it was never corrected, even on later pressings!), and 2) never was certified gold. Beatles historian Bruce Spizer has on multiple occasions expressed bafflement over this anomaly; seriously, you want to make me believe that "Ticket To Ride" didn't ship a million copies in 1965, let alone in the 52 years since? Heck, half a million even? (The number for gold was lowered to 500,000 years ago.) What bridge do you want to sell me now?
Rain (source: Mono Masters) - The next time someone tells you Ringo was the "least talented" Beatle or repeats that thing that JOHN LENNON NEVER EVER EVER SAID about Ringo not being the "best drummer in the Beatles," sit that person's ass down with a good pair of headphones plugged into a recording of "Rain." Oh, yeah. And make sure that person knows that the backing track -- including Ringo's drumming -- was actually recorded at a faster speed and was slowed down before the vocals were overdubbed. Whoa. Yet another example of that A/B Lennon/McCartney dichotomy, this B-side musically says the same thing as "Paperback Writer," but in Lennon's voice. I chose the mono mix because I don't really like how the vocal is isolated to one side of the stereo with so much else going on.
Tomorrow Never Knows (source: Revolver, stereo version, 2009 edition) - I actually did consider using the mono version for this playlist. I like the pre-echo effect used on the guitar solo and the (slightly) different placement of some of the sound effects. But the stereo version sounds a lot brighter. The track itself? Wow. "An early clue to the new direction." Tape loops all over the place. Backwards guitar solo. An early (perhaps the first known?) use of an organ's Leslie speaker applied to a voice. An audio acid trip. One chord. Just a C chord droning, with one of the tape loops sometimes coincidentally changing it to a C7 chord. You want to see an amazing set of video footage that fits with this song perfectly? Go to YouTube and type "tomorrow never knows mad men" as the search terms. Oh, did I mention that this was the first song recorded for Revolver? And that it took only three takes to perfect?
Strawberry Fields Forever (source: It's Not Too Bad bootleg, US stereo mix) - I believe it was 1987 when I first heard "Strawberry Fields Forever." The only songs from the Magical Mystery Tour album I knew were the ones that were on the Reel Music compilation, but I had read bits and pieces about this song from various Trivial Pursuit "Baby Boomer Edition" questions and what I read in a few books I got from the library. When I finally heard the song on a '70s Capitol reissue of Magical Mystery Tour, it was exactly as I imagined it: Lennon psychedlic bliss. The Beatles recorded three different versions of "Strawberry Fields Forever." John Lennon told producer George Martin that he wanted to use both versions two and three for the final product. George said it'd be impossible because the two versions are in different keys and tempos. John said, "You'll figure it out." Solution: speed up version two a little, slow down version three a little; keys and tempos now match. The first part of the song is version two, second part version three. The edit is on the word "going" in the second chorus. I could go on for pages and pages about the significance of that edit being on that one word. Many people think the edit is brilliant; others, including Sir George himself, have said it's a terrible edit that sticks out like a sore thumb. I, however, wouldn't have it any other way. For this playlist I chose the US stereo version, as that's the one I had heard the first time. It's taken from a bootleg on the Vigotone label that traces the evolution of "Strawberry Fields Forever." The canonical version that you're likely to hear, be it on the radio or from your CD collection, is actually mastered from the German pressing of the Magical Mystery Tour album. Why? Because the German version is 100% in stereo, while the US version (remember, the UK didn't get the album until 1976!) was stereo except for the last three songs, which were fake stereo. But the US version has some extra reverb on the vocal that adds to the trippiness of the song; the German stereo mix has a pretty dry vocal, albeit with an extra "cranberry sauce" at the end that you won't hear on the US version.
I Am The Walrus (source: The U.S. Singles Collection, Dr. Ebbetts) - There is no question about it: if you're putting "Strawberry Fields Forever" on a "perfect Beatles songs" list, you also need to put "I Am The Walrus" on the same list. And they need to be next to each other. Most of the lyrics are nonsense, but overall the song is nothing short of genius, right down to the story of how the song came about in the first place. Heck, even Paul McCartney's selling point for the Magical Mystery Tour film is that it has "I Am The Walrus." This is arguably the most Beatle Beatles song ever. For this list I chose the US single version, which has an extra measure between the phrases "I'm crying" and "Yellow matter custard;" all other versions cut that out -- dammit, I want the whole product. Also, the stereo version suddenly switches to fake stereo for the second part because the radio and other effects were recorded live during the mono mixdown; a stereo mix is possible and has been done (by fans) but has not yet been released, which is another reason I opted for the (mono) US single version.
If I Needed Someone (source: Rubber Soul, original 1965 stereo mix from The Beatles In Mono) - George Harrison does The Byrds! Don't believe me? Listen to The Byrds' version of "The Bells of Rhymney," and then immediately listen to this. It's no surprise: during a press conference once The Beatles said that The Byrds were their favorite American band...which itself isn't a surprise because to get their overall look and feel, The Byrds literally went to see A Hard Day's Night and took notes on everything they saw. I chose the original 1965 stereo mix mainly because the guitar solo really jumps out -- you can actually hear fingerpicking during the guitar solo (probably done by John), but not so much on the mono mix or George Martin's 1986 remix (which is the canonical version, by the way).
Leave My Kitten Alone (source: Anthology 2) - Perhaps the biggest head-scratcher among die-hard Beatles fans is to think about how the Powers That Be deemed "Mr. Moonlight" to be releasable, but not "Leave My Kitten Alone." Really? Listen to that damn song and tell me it's not one of the ass-kickiest covers The Beatles ever did. Why on earth did it sit unreleased for 32 years?!
I Want to Hold Your Hand (source: Meet The Beatles!, mono, from the 2004 box set The Capitol Albums Vol. 1) - There's no question about including this song. Dippy? Sure. (Which may explain why The Beatles never performed it again after 1964 but still kept "She Loves You" in their concerts.) But what's not perfect about it? The chorus is short, easy, and catchy. The intro builds up into an explosion of The Beatles telling the world, "WE'VE ARRIVED! (and to prove it, we're here)" After "Love Me Do," "Please Please Me," and "She Loves You" were rejected by Capitol, who had right of first refusal on imported products from parent company EMI, Capitol finally...uhh, rejected "I Want To Hold Your Hand" until Capitol Records president Alan Livingston -- at the encouragement/demand of his wife -- stepped in and made Dave Dexter add it to the release lineup. What happened next? Oh, right...Beatlemania in the United States. How can you not include "I Want To Hold Your Hand"? I went with the mono version, as there isn't a decent enough stereo mix at my disposal, and I felt the version on the 2004 CD release of Meet The Beatles! has more punch than the other versions released on a digital medium (be it CD or download).
This Boy (source: Mono Masters) - When I first heard "This Boy," I thought it sounded way too professional to be an original. It had to be a cover of a Platters song or something. Then I looked at the credits. There were a few other Beatles songs that gave me the same thought: "It sounds too professional to be a Beatles original." I learned that if it sounds too good to be a Beatles original, it is a Beatles original. The three-part harmony is impeccable. Little subtle thing I noticed not too long ago: listen to George Harrison on the line "would always feel..." He sings the word "feel" with melisma. I chose the mono mix because the vocals need to be in both speakers.
She Loves You (source: Past Masters) - Honestly, I don't have much to say about "She Loves You" other than that it's loud, explosive, and in your face. The original session tapes were lost or erased, but then how are there so many different versions of this song with different edit points? I chose the version from the 2009 reissue of Past Masters because it's the cleanest sounding of all the edits. Oh, yeah: dig that G6 chord that George, John, and Paul sing on that final "yeah."
Please Please Me (source: Please Please Me, stereo, 2009 edition) - I'm pretty sure my original, lost-to-history version of this playlist did not have "Please Please Me." But its requirement is mandatory. Yes, we all know about the "started out a a Roy Orbison-esque slow song" story. But it is indeed the result of that story that made me create some room in the playlist for this song. "Congratulations, boys; you've just recorded your first #1," said Sir George Martin over the talkback at Studio 2, so legend has it. Sure enough, their second single hit #1 on four of the singles charts in England...except none of those four charts became the single de facto standard, hence its non-inclusion on 1. I chose the stereo version because, again, the stereo mixes of the early albums sound brighter to me, but more importantly, there stereo mix has a Lennon vocal slip-up on the last verse, followed by a semi-laughed singing of the phrase "Come on." How can you not love that?
Roll Over Beethoven (source: The Beatles' Second Album, stereo, from The Capitol Albums Vol. 1) - Yes, I've heard the Electric Light Orchestra version. Doesn't hold a candle to The Beatles' version. Show me a Chuck Berry song The Beatles didn't significantly improve. Go on, I dares ya. I chose the "Dexterized" stereo mix from their second Capitol Records album; it has a lot of excitement to it, which I learned as I was driving home from work in 2004 the day I got The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1, and as I was driving through Howell, NJ on route 33, this song burst out of the speakers. It made my 38-mile-one-way commute so much more bearable.
Kansas City / Hey Hey Hey Hey (source: Beatles For Sale, stereo) - It disturbs me to no end how much vitriol this Little Richard cover gets from fans. Come on, man! Nothing but excitement here, and how can you not yell "HEY! HEY! HEY! HEY!" during the call/response part? Oh...and much like "Twist and Shout," the Fabs nailed this song in one take. Tried another take, wasn't as exciting, so take 1 was used. Stereo version is the only option.
You Can't Do That (source: A Hard Day's Night (UK), stereo) - I'll tell you why this B-side (and video outtake from A Hard Day's Night in which a teenage Phil Collins can be spotted in the crowd) is perfect. Beatlefest 1996 at the Hyatt Regency O'Hare in Chicago. A group of kids named Generations got up during the Battle of the Bands and just absolutely frickin' nailed "You Can't Do That." Before they even finished the opening riff, all Beatles fans in the ballroom were on their feet. Hear it live performed by a good band, and you'll truly hear how everything just comes together. Generations brought the place down. Sadly, they got knocked out in the finals after a lacklustre performance of "Twist and Shout." This song needs to be heard in stereo; it loses a lot in mono.
I Feel Fine (source: 1+) - This is another song that you need to sit your Ringo-hating friends down for. The drumming is nothing short of divine; listen to that cymbal work! Catchy riffs throughout the song, lyrics that stick in the brain, and that classic opening bit with McCartney's A-string making another guitar's A-string vibrate...just perfection from start to finish.
I've Got a Feeling (source: Let It Be...Naked) - Near the end of 1968, John Lennon wrote a song called "Everybody Had a Hard Year." His brother-from-another-mother Paul McCartney had another song he was working on called "I've Got a Feeling." Both songs had similar chord patterns. Put the two together and you have classic Lennon-McCartney synergy. Everybody on the recording -- Ringo on his drums, George with some great licks, John with some great vocals (check out the Yellow Dog bootleg Celluloid Rock for an outtake in which he's a dead ringer for Bruce Springsteen), Billy with some attention-grabbing electric piano seasonings, and a killer bassline from Paul -- is nothing short of essential. Listen to the version from the 2003 album Let It Be...Naked and enjoy the punch the song packs as opposed to its heavily filtered Spector production on the Let It Be album.
Golden Slumbers / Carry That Weight / The End (source: Abbey Road, 2009 edition) - I admit, I only put this on the playlist because I figured if I didn't, I'd get lynched. Truth be told, I'd most likely skip this simply because "A Huge Melody" is ubiquitous, especially the maudlin part 2. I guess you just can't deny the importance of these three tracks with their lyrics, George Martin's orchestral touches, Ringo's only drum solo, and the final sentence that was essentially The Beatles' farewell message to the world. For this playlist I actually have all three tracks merged into one big one. I left out "Her Majesty" for the same reason many people think the British version of Sgt. Pepper's goes too far by following the neverending chord with a dog whistle and chopped up tape.
Hey Jude (source: Mono Masters) - At least in the States, "Hey Jude" is The Beatles' most successful song. It's got a good message and is fairly easy to play on a piano or a guitar. If you question its inclusion on a list of perfect Beatles songs, then go to YouTube and look for the video of that guy cheering up an angry mob of delayed passengers at Newark International Airport by leading the crowd in a "Hey Jude" singalong. I admit I got sick of this song a long time ago, but when I listened to the mono version in 2009, it was a completely new experience, especially with the bass line.
Let It Be (source: Past Masters) - I tell ya, if there's anything that could make this song not perfect, it'd be if the ending were any different. Listen to those final chords and tell me it doesn't say, "SO THERE." Actually, if I had my druthers, I'd fly in the guitar solo from the album version and change the last verse so that it contains the line "There will be no sorrow." But hey, I'm tired; not gonna bother.
A Day in the Life (source: Love) - If you can listen to "A Day in the Life" and cannot understand its inclusion on a "perfect Beatles songs" list, then you're beyond help. I won't even try to explain it to you. I chose the Love version for two reasons: it includes Lennon's infamous "sugar plum fairy" count-in, and it has a clean start.

Should you choose to build this playlist yourself, be warned: it's a dangerous listen, hearing so much greatness in one sitting. You may not be able to talk for hours afterwards. Good luck.

The People Need to STFU Rant, Part 1: The iPhone 4

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Sat, 17 Jul 2010 03:04:00 -0400

No, not that I'd ever deprive anybody of one's First Amendment rights, but I am finding a lot of people who need to just, well...shut up or go away. Allow me to explain two examples I recently encountered:

1) The people causing the iPhone 4 brouhaha, and
2) The bitchers and moaners on the #22 CTA bus heading northbound at around 12:30am today.

Now, let's start with the iPhone business.

Problems: there is a bug in the code that calculates the number of bars that should display to represent the signal strength; if you hold the iPhone a certain way during an active call, the call will drop because of the way the antenna is situated; and finally, one could accidentally disconnect a call if one's cheek (face cheek, smartass!) accidentally touches the virtual "End Call" button due to a bug in the phone's sensitivity thingy. (Technical, aren't I?) As a result -- especially of the antenna problem -- it seems the world is calling for Steve Jobs's head on a lance.

I have several things to say about this:

- I'm just going to ignore the cheek problem and the signal bar problem for now; Apple has acknowledged these issues and is working on fixes; in fact, the signal bar issue has been around since the very first iPhone.

- Wow. Microsoft continually knowingly releases buggy products that constantly require patches and updates, and nobody says diddly. A phone comes out with three reported problems and suddenly Apple is the root of all evil.

- "Just don't hold it that way" -- a bit of advice that offended the masses. Come on, now; this is nothing new. Don't believe me? Go to your favorite search engine and look for "nokia 2320 user manual:" you will find instructions that tell you how NOT to hold the phone, for the same reason!

- Apple denying there was a problem -- did they flat-out say there wasn't a problem, period, or did they say THEY haven't found a problem? There's a difference between a third party thinking they found a bug and Apple finding it.

- In fact, I don't believe Apple flat-out DENIED there was a problem; in fact they announced it was a software issue. Okay, this is a bit shady, but yes, you can theoretically use software to fix a hardware problem. (Hmmm...notice how when iPod firmware is updated, sometimes the result is a longer battery charge? So it goes to show that sometimes you can affect hardware with software.)

- There are reports that an anonymous developer leaked to the media that the development team knew all along that there were antenna problems, but the powers that be wouldn't listen to them. Okay, then why did this come out only after news got out that there were antenna problems? Why did the anonymous developer not warn us sooner?

- Speaking of leaking (unintentional rhyme, but damn, am I impressed!)...what about the prototype that was left behind in a bar? (Tell me that wasn't a setup.) Gee, I don't remember Gizmodo talking about the antenna problems. Makes me think that the brouhaha is more of a molehill than a mountain.

- Put a piece of insulating tape -- electrical tape, duct tape, whatever -- over the little black lines on the side of the iPhone. "I shouldn't have to do that!," I hear people say. CAN you do it? Then STFU and do it. These are the same people who bitch about, say, other people not volunteering to help clean up after a party, yet when you ask these people, "Did you ask anybody to help?" they say, "Well, I shouldn't have to." Oh, shut your face and do it if you have to.

- Another solution: put a bumper on the phone. Apple is giving those away with iPhone 4s now and is refunding the price to anybody who bought 'em before yesterday's press conference.

- "I demand a refund!" No problem -- there's a 30-day return policy; the iPhone 4, at the time of this writing, hasn't even been out for 30 days.

- The dropped call problem an issue that is only affecting some users. Thing is, Apple sold so many iPhone 4s at once -- more than they've ever sold before -- that it seems like more people are finding this bug all at the same time than usual, so it appears bigger than it is. And that it's not affecting everybody became very apparent to me yesterday when I personally tested three different iPhone 4s and tried my damnedest to disconnect phone calls that I made. I gave the phone the famous death grip that's causing all the problems. I tried with both my right and left hands. I even attempted to crush the damn thing. Result: call stayed connected, and when I watched the screen when I did this, signal bars didn't budge. (I also couldn't disconnect a call with my cheek, for the record.)

- Oh, and gee...people seem to not realize the exact same issue happened with the iPhone 3GS, yet nobody said a word. Hmmm. Go figure. Well, OK, to be fair, it wasn't the exact same issue -- the iPhone 4 problem happens on the left side of the phone, but the 3GS problem happens on the right side.

So everybody, just shut. the. fluorine. up.

My next STFU rant will be an extreme rarity: I'll be defending the Chicago Transit Authority.

Kick-Ass Beach Boys Song #2: "Marcella"

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 16:29:00 -0400

As there are merely hours left before Brian Wilson's birthday, it occurs to me that it's been a long time...a really long time...since I've discussed a "kick-ass Beach Boys song," and that was only the first one!

My last KABBS was "Surfin' USA" for what it was at the time and what it still means to this day, even for hodads like me who have never been on surfboards, unless you count a Boogie Board. This time, though, I need to draw attention to the next decade.

In 1972, the Beach Boys released an album called Carl and the Passions - "So Tough". It was an odd one for several reasons. First of all, the Beach Boys' name did not appear on the cover. (That's right, young 'uns -- that CD you have is an inaccurate representation of the original cover! The stenciled band name was added when Caribou reissued the album on CD in 1990.) Certainly that omission caused some confusion. Second, the album only had eight songs. Third, in the United States it was packaged as a double-album with a reissue of Pet Sounds, which meant that if you wanted to buy the new Beach Boys album that had only 8 songs, you had to buy Pet Sounds with it and pay for a double-LP. Perhaps the inclusion of Pet Sounds was to make up for the fourth oddity about this album: not much from Brian Wilson. Yeah, he's listed as one of the producers and a background vocalist, but he only had two songs on the album; at the time, this album had less input from Brian Wilson than any other new Beach Boys album.

However, one of the two songs he contributed, "Marcella," is pure gold. Based mainly on a then-unreleased song from 1969 or 1970 called "I Just Got My Pay," "Marcella" has a good driving rhythm with some nicely layered vocals, including a soulful Dennis Wilson countermelody that really stands out at the end of each verse. Just good, raw rock'n'roll. Sure, the track has some oddities, like the weird wordplay that's characteristic of many songs whose lyrics are cowritten by then-manager Jack Rieley, and the intro is very weird (single a high-pitched chord that sounds like a sledgehammer hitting the post of a chain-link fence), but once you get past that, pure enjoyment.

You want a true kick-ass experience? Get yourself a copy of Greatest Hits Volume Three: The Best of the Brother Years. Next time you go for a drive, pop it in the CD player. Now, crank the bass up...all the way up. And turn the volume up loud enough for you to enjoy it, but not loud enough that you ruin your ears. And keep the windows ROLLED UP. (You'll know the bass is forward enough and the volume is loud enough if you start to suspect your rearview mirror might rattle off the windshield or you're afraid your windows might shatter. Don't worry -- they won't.) Something about the mix or the mastering on this particular CD really packs an extra punch that you don't get on the other CD releases of "Marcella."

Or perhaps enjoy the version from the 1973 album The Beach Boys In Concert. The weird chord at the beginning is replaced by a really cool rock'n'roll riff on an electric guitar.

Is Brian Wilson performing near you soon? Then go to his concert -- he usually has "Marcella" in his set. (Word on the street is he loves performing that song.) The arrangement his band uses is basically the same as the version on In Concert except in the beginning, Brian plays some doo-wop chords on his keyboard with Taylor Mills improvising a wordless vocal over it. For the choruses, Paul Mertens whips out his diatonic A harp. And dig Mike D'Amico belting out the "Marcella, he-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-e-y" vocal during the end of the song..and count yourself lucky if Scott Bennett is designated to play the guitar solo that night. Wow. Just wow.

The Beatles' Definitive CD Versions: The 1966 Single

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Sat, 22 May 2010 09:47:00 -0400

When you consider all that happened, 1966 was a pretty dark year for The Beatles and their fans. The "more popular than Jesus" comment was taken out of context. The trip to The Philippines proved to be disastrous, to say the least. Exhausted from touring, The Beatles as a touring unit threw in the towel, ending after John allegedly played the opening riff of "In My Life" at the end of the Candlestick Park concert that August. Unless you count the Capitol compilation Yesterday And Today and the U.S. singles taken from various releases, The Beatles' only audio releases of 1966 were Revolver and the single "Paperback Writer" b/w "Rain." Fans and the media were wondering if this meant the end of The Beatles. In a way it was, but in another way it was the rebirth of The Beatles.

The CDs and abbreviations used this time around for the whopping two songs:

PM87 - Past Masters, Vol. 1, compiled in 1987 and released in 1988 to include Beatles tracks that didn't appear on the canonical album catalog.

SINGLE - The Complete Singles Collection, a box set from 1992 that compiled all the Beatles' singles on mini-CDs, complete with reproductions of the picture sleeves.

RED - the "red album," officially called 1962-1966 and sold as a two-CD set in 1993 despite the ability to easily fit the entire contents on one CD.

1 - the 2000 album that compiled the officially-recognized #1 hits from The Beatles in both the U.S. and U.K. Beatles fans the world over knew this album would be a huge flop (case in point: 1982's 20 Greatest Hits). Check the RIAA site to see what a flop it was.

MM - Mono Masters, the mono equivalent to Past Masters found in the box set The Beatles In Mono.

PM09 - Past Masters, 2009 remastered edition.

PAPERBACK WRITER

MONO VERSIONS:
SINGLE:
Good punchy sound, good equalization.

MM:
Still good, but the drums and bass have some extra punch that give the track more energy.

STEREO VERSIONS:
PM87:
Why were so many of the Beatles' single tracks given poor stereo mixes? The sound is pretty unbalanced.

RED:
Still not a great sound balance (why pan the drums hard-left and the bass hard-right?), but the sound is a marked improvement over PM87. It even sounds like this version was sourced from an earlier master.

1:
Sounds a lot like RED but more bassy. The vocals sound more sibilant, though, so the treble is just a skosh too high.

PM09:
I can't really tell the difference between this version and RED. Definitely brighter than PM87 without the vocal sibilance of 1.

Worst mono version: CD Singles Collection
Really tough decision -- yet another instance of picking the "less good" version.

Best mono version: Mono Masters
Overall a great sound on both mono versions, but the extra punch in the drums and bass push the latest mono version slightly over the edge.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters Vol. 1 (1987)
A relatively primitive mastering emphasizes the lack of balance among the instruments and vocals.

Best stereo version: 1
In terms of overall cleanliness and brightness, all the stereo versions after 1987 are good, but the emphasis on the bass wins me over on 1; also, the uneven balance doesn't sound as bad.

Definitive CD version of "Paperback Writer": Mono Masters
The mono version easily wins out. You can hear every instrument very nicely and cleanly. It's nice to hear the taps at the end of the second verse, mixed out in the stereo version. Also, the song is several seconds longer in mono, giving the fans more music to enjoy. Finally, you gotta love the echo effect at the end of each verse, which you just don't get on the stereo version. Classic!

RAIN

Anybody who calls Ringo "the least talented Beatle" obviously hasn't heard his drumming on this track. His style here is almost robotic. "Rain" is basically John's "Paperback Writer:" Lennon says the same thing McCartney says with "Paperback Writer" but in his own unique way, both musically and lyrically.

MONO VERSIONS:
SINGLE:
Good sound balance, but could use better equalization. Needs more treble!

MM:
Unfortunately, we don't have good EQ here, either. But as is typical with most of the mono tracks in the 2009 reissues, the bass has some extra emphasis yet without overpowering the rest of the sound.

STEREO VERSIONS:
PM87:
Just seconds into this track, you'll learn who the true star of the stereo version of "Rain" is: the tambourine. Eep...

PM09:
The only noticeable difference with this version is that John's vocal sounds a tiny bit brighter; everything else is the same.

Worst mono version: The CD Singles Collection
Truth be told, both mono versions are kind of...blah...but this one more so.

Best mono version: Mono Masters
Just a tad bit better than the version on the single box, with the stronger bass line.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters Vol. 1 (1987)
But not much worse than...

Best stereo version: Past Masters (2009)
The slightly cleaner sound on John's voice made me pick this version.

Definitive CD version of "Rain": Mono Masters
I hate to say it, but the stereo versions of "Rain" are just terrible. Once the vocals come in, the backing track is almost inaudible. The mix is very poorly balanced -- the backing track and lead vocals on the left, backing vocals and tambourine on the right...who does that?! The mono mix isn't anything to write home about, either, with its desperately-needed equalization. It's a shame that one of Lennon's finest moments doesn't get more respect.

The Beatles' Definitive CD Versions: The 1965 Singles

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Mon, 3 May 2010 21:05:00 -0400

The CDs and abbreviations this time around:

PM87 - Past Masters, Vol. 1, compiled in 1987 and released in 1988 to include Beatles tracks that didn't appear on the canonical album catalog.

SINGLE - The Complete Singles Collection, a box set from 1992 that compiled all the Beatles' singles on mini-CDs, complete with reproductions of the picture sleeves.

RED - the "red album," officially called 1962-1966 and sold as a two-CD set in 1993 despite the ability to easily fit the entire contents on one CD.

CAPITOL (mono) - mono mixes from The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1 from 2004, specifically Beatles VI.

CAPITOL (fake stereo) - Back in the '60s, if a stereo mix wasn't available for a song, engineers would apply crazy EQ and other effects to simulate stereo, and the result was usually atrocious. The "fake stereo" designation will refer to any tracks from The Capitol Albums from the "stereo" albums but are really processed mono. When I compare "best mono," "best stereo," etc. versions, anything that's actually fake stereo will be considered mono.

CAPITOL (stereo) - if you can't figure out what I mean by this after reading my explanations for the other two Capitol designations, then you really need to put down the joint and come back after you sober up.

1 - the 2000 album that compiled the officially-recognized #1 hits from The Beatles in both the U.S. and U.K. Beatles fans the world over knew this album would be a huge flop (case in point: 1982's 20 Greatest Hits). Check the RIAA site to see what a flop it was.

MM - Mono Masters, the mono equivalent to Past Masters found in the box set The Beatles In Mono.

PM09 - Past Masters, 2009 edition, the two-volume remastered version.

YES IT IS

The B-side of "Ticket To Ride," there's not much more to say about this song other than it was, as Lennon once said, a failed attempt to come up with another "This Boy." There's nothing wrong with this track, mind you, it's just not the most standout song in the catalog. There are some things, I suppose, I need to mention: three-part harmonies, first time blah blah tone pedal blah blah George still figuring out blah blah, song possibly about a dead girlfriend/wife blah blah...

MONO VERSIONS:
SINGLE:
Good, full sound; balanced EQ; nice, even mix of vocals and instrumentation.

CAPITOL (mono):
The version that ended up on the mono Beatles VI doesn't really sound much different from the single version. The sound is still nice and full, and the EQ is respectable. There may be a bit more reverb and maybe a bit more on the high-end (unnecessarily), but overall, a pretty good playback. There is a bit more noticeable hiss, though, so either the version in the singles box was noise-reduced, or the American version suffers from the usual generational loss.

CAPITOL (fake stereo):
A horrible high-on-the-left, low-on-the-right reverb-laden fake stereo mix. Yes, I listened to this with headphones, and yes, one might have a different experience with speakers, but trust me, no matter how you listen to it, the result is bad. Yes, it is!

MM:
Again, a good, balanced sound with tasteful equalization -- which is a nice surprise, considering how much of the 2009 mono masters are sorely lacking in treble. The sound is slightly brighter than that of the singles box version.

STEREO VERSIONS:
PM87:
The stereo mix is really nice; it sounds quite ambient, and there isn't much in terms of hard panning. I hear an acoustic guitar in the left channel that I couldn't hear on the mono versions. There are a few dropouts, though. No noticeable hiss. The clarity is surprisingly good -- at the end, you can actually hear George's foot on the volume pedal.

PM09:
Even cleaner and brighter than PM87 -- there are only two or three dropouts throughout the whole track. However, I noticed that George's foot isn't as audible as on PM87!

Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums Vol. 1 ["stereo"]
Fake stereo at its second-worst. (For its first-worst, listen to the Beatles '65 "stereo" mixes of "She's A Woman" and "I Feel Fine."

Best mono version: Mono Masters
Plain and simple, a pleasure to listen to.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters Vol. 1 (1987)
But despite being "worst" (or should I say, "worse," because there are only two true stereo versions?), it's still not bad.

Best stereo version: Past Masters (2009)
Clarity and ambient, tasteful stereo separation -- really nice.

Definitive CD version of "Yes It Is": Past Masters (2009)
Yaaay -- the first instance in this little project of having both mono and stereo versions being from the newest set of reissues! Apple did this one right in 2009, especially the stereo version.

I'M DOWN

What do you do when the Little Richard song you've been using as a concert closer gets stale? You write your own Little Richard song to end with!

MONO VERSIONS:
SINGLE:
In terms of sound, not bad. Driving rhythm, good vocals, although there might have been a lot of noise reduction used on this version. It seems that through most of the song, though, the only audible instruments are drums, bongos, and bass; even the organ is pretty low-key until Lennon's solo.

MM:
A bright recording that once again de-emphasizes the organ. It almost sounds as if this version were mastered from an earlier generation; maybe the single version indeed was noise-reduced on the box set but not so much on MM?

STEREO VERSIONS:
PM87:
Actually, this isn't a bad recording -- nice, bright feel with an okay stereo balance. I do find myself wishing that the vocals were brighter, though. And that the bass and drums weren't panned hard-left. It's nice, though, how on the stereo version you can actually hear John's fingers (or elbow?) slide up and down the keyboard. I don't like that it fades out earlier, though.

PM09:
Wishing that the vocals were brighter? Wish granted! Actually, everything sounds noticeably cleaner: the vocals, the instruments, the overall sound...it sounds so fresh. Really nice. Even heard some laughter in the organ solo that I never heard before. I'm not saying it's not in the 1987 master, but it really jumped out on the 2009 master.

Worst mono version: The CD Singles Collection
I hate to say "worst" as it's still quite good.

Best mono version: Mono Masters
Just a tad bit better than the version on the single box.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters Vol. 1 (1987)
Not so much worst but least-good. (Or less-good...again with the grammar!)

Best stereo version: Past Masters (2009)
Brightness all around; to say that listening to this version is a pleasure is an understatement.

Definitive CD version of "I'm Down": Past Masters (2009)
Honestly, this was a tough decision, deciding essentially between the new mono and the new stereo masters. I went with the stereo version simply because it leapt out at me a bit more. Truth be told, listen to either, and you're in for a really nice treat. You can't go wrong.

WE CAN WORK IT OUT

If I'm being honest, I don't care for "We Can Work It Out." Too repetitive, too overplayed for me, too "so what?" for me. But it does feature a great example of Paul's songwriting on the topic at hand versus John's songwriting, and of course the earliest use of harmonium on a Beatles recording.

MONO VERSIONS:
SINGLE:
The sound is bright, but it sounds as if there's something missing. I guess the best way I can explain it is that the sound is bright yet hollow.

MM:
Okay, this is better. The treble was taken down a slight notch, but not enough to detract from the EQ. In fact, there's emphasis on the bass that's not on the single version. Very nice.

STEREO VERSIONS:
PM87:
There's something boring about this version. I don't quite know what it is, but there's something boring here. It might be in the vocals, which are panned hard-right and mixed too loudly.

RED:
A noticeable improvement over the 1987 version of Past Masters Vol. 1. The left channel (with the rhythm track) is potted up a little more, and the overall sound is brighter.

1:
Actually, this version doesn't sound too different from the "red album" version. I am noticing that the acoustic guitar in the left channel is easier to hear than on prior versions. Overall a pretty clean master.

PM09:
Slightly better than the red album version, but not as bright as the 1 version.

Worst mono version: The CD Singles Collection
Again, something is missing...

Best mono version: Mono Masters
...and it's in this version.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters Vol. 1 (1987)
Vocal channel too loud, overall sound too boring.

Best stereo version: 1
Best equalization, cleanest sound, and good balance of instruments plus vocals. (Yes, I did just take what I said about "I Feel FIne" and use it here. Got a problem with that?)

Definitive CD version of "We Can Work It Out": Mono Masters
This version has the best equalization. Also, the stereo versions have the vocals isolated to one side of the stereo, which can be distracting to hear.

DAY TRIPPER

When I first heard this song in the late '80s, for some reason I thought the guitar riff was reminiscent of early Kiss material. And of course, as with any other guitar-playing Beatles fan, when I taught myself to play guitar, this was the first riff I learned how to play.

Perhaps the rabid fans' favorite moment is the part on the line "Tried to please her" in which there's a sudden dropout of tambourine in what sounds like might be a bad edit. On stereo versions the dropout sounds to be isolated only to the right channel, with the tambourine, vocals, and lead guitar, so it sounds like this dropout is possibly a technical glitch that either happened during overdubs or is isolated to certain track(s) on the session tape.

MONO VERSIONS:
SINGLE:
Lots of hiss, and the equalization could use a little more treble. The infamous dropout during the last verse sticks out like a sore thumb.

MM:
Lots of hiss in the beginning that quickly goes away. A bit brighter than the single version and with more punch in the bass. The dropout is still there.

STEREO VERSIONS:
PM87:
While I've been writing about how much I wish there were more treble in the new mono remasters, on this stereo version of "Day Tripper" there's too much treble and not much bass. Overall the balance is pretty bad: too much tambourine, vocals isolated to the right channel, and the basic track on the left channel is too far in the background.

RED:
The left channel is mixed a bit louder than on PM87, the bass is slightly more audible, and the hiss at the beginning is virtually gone. As a result, the sound is noticeably better than on the 1987 version. However, the balance is still a little off.

1:
Sounds like RED but with less bass. Dropout is fixed with an edit, but if you listen carefully, you can spot said edit.

PM09:
Sounds just like RED but with the poor balance of PM87. Very clean and bright sound, though. The dropout is corrected as on 1, but the edit is either inaudible or very difficult to detect.

Worst mono version: The Complete CD Singles Collection
Yet another instance of the song not actually sounding bad, but there is a better version out there.

Best mono version: Mono Masters
Better balance of lows and highs.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters Vol. 1 (1987)
Too much treble, very unbalanced mixed.

Best stereo version: 1962-1966
Best stereo balance, best EQ, and the most recent stereo version that still has the beloved dropout.

Definitive CD version of "Day Tripper": Mono Masters (2009)
I picked the mono version because it's easier on the ears and has the best bass sound -- a driving bass truly helps this song get into its groove. And the dropout that the most fanatical listeners adore is loud and clear on this version. My ideal version of "Day Tripper" actually would be taking the best elements of the stereo mix (reverb on the vocals, which are dry on the mono version; louder vocals during the middle 8 -- the middle-8 vocals are nearly inaudible in mono) and the mono mix (driving bass line and longer fadeout).

The Beatles' Definitive CD Versions: The 1964 Singles

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Sat, 27 Mar 2010 23:34:00 -0400

KOMM, GIB MIR DEINE HAND

In 1964, German record label execs were complaining that they can't have ideal sales on s ongs sung in English, so to comply with their requests, George Martin had The Beatles record their two biggest hits to date, "I Want To Hold Your Hand" and "She Loves You," in German. The group was on a short break in Paris during a tour and protested having to do this task for such a trivial reason on their day off, but who's going to defy George Martin's wishes? While they were at it, the guys also recorded "Can't Buy Me Love." The two German songs were released as a single in Germany, which is why I included it in the "1964 Singles" post.

The "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand" vocals were overdubbed onto the "I Want To Hold Your Hand" multitracks. The lyrics were provided by a couple of Germanophones (is that a real world?) EMI outsourced; not only were the lyrics translated, but they were also changed so that there'd be a rhyme scheme in the new German version. (Indeed, do you remember the English lyrics ever saying "Oh, you are so pretty, pretty as a diamond"?)

There are two mixes: a mono mix and a stereo mix. On the stereo mix, the backing track is panned hard-left, while the vocals and handclaps are panned hard-right. Many fans have taken the "I Want To Hold Your Hand" stereo backing track as extracted from the Anthology DVD's 5.1 soundtrack and synched it up to the "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand" vocal track to get a stereo version of the song with centered vocals; you can actually find my attempt on one of the Tuned To A Natural E compilations.

Now, let's talk about that music, shall we?

MONO VERSIONS:
PM87:
Interesting; I don't remember it sounding this bad before; then again, I've been listening to the Something New version ever since The Capitol Albums came out. Bad EQ. Also, it sounds like the tape "breathes" in some places, know what I mean?

CAPITOL (mono):
The Something New mono version is actually a really good track. The EQ is good, with enough emphasis on the bass and the treble to make it a really exciting piece of music. As for the mix itself, there's a great balance of all the instruments and vocals. The vocals are actually pretty dry, which surprised me because I'm so used to hearing them reverbed. There might be a tape glitch or two, but not enough to affect one's enjoyment of the song.

MM:
Take all the treble out of the Something New version, press it to a record, wear the record out severely, and you have, unfortunately, the 2009 Mono Masters reissue. It vocals are very distorted, and the equalization leaves much to be desired. I dunno, maybe I have a bad CD or something? But at least I didn't notice any tape glitches. Basically, this is the 1987 version but with vocal distortion.

STEREO VERSIONS:
CAPITOL (stereo):
Extremely bright sound. Unfortunately, the vocals are too loud, especially in the headphones. At the very beginning of the track, you can hear a voice (McCartney's?) and some whispering. There's a lot of hiss on this track; I'm guessing that The Beatles overdubbed their German vocals on a copy of the original multitracks, meaning there's one generation of analog tape lost, and of course most (if not all) of the Capitol albums were mastered from copies of the British masters, which means yet another generation of tape loss on this track, so it's understandable that there's noticeable hiss.

PM09:
Again with the bad mastering on the 2009 version -- what the heck?! The left channel sounds noise-reduced beyond all recognition, and there's just no equalization to speak of; it's all middle. The vocals sound a bit distorted, but not as distorted as on MM.

Worst mono version: Mono Masters
Uck. That's all I can say. Uck.

Best mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1
If you thought the 2004 box set releases of the American albums were unnecessary, you were sorely mistaken. Because of The Capitol Albums, we have a good-sounding version of "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand."

Worst stereo version: Past Masters (2009)
I guess the German songs were considered a novelty or something; why else did they obviously get no care and attention on the reissue campaign?

Definitive CD version of "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand": The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1 (mono)
The bright EQ, nice balance, and the intact excitement make the version from the mono Something New win out. The EQ easily puts it over the top against the 1987 and 2009 issues. As for mono over stereo? Quite simply, the stereo mix isn't balanced very well at all.

SIE LIEBT DICH

I don't care what any of the fan sites' conspiracy theories say, The Beatles rerecorded the backing track for this song because the "She Loves You" multitracks simply no longer existed; they were stolen, erased, or just plain lost, depending on whom you believe. If you don't believe me that the backing tracks are different, just listen -- it's very obvious. If you still don't believe me, refer to your Mark Lewisohn book.

Now...in Germany, this was the B-side of "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand." "Sie Liebt Dich" was nowhere to be found in England in 1964 as a domestic product. In the United States, though, it found its way onto a Swan single, with "I'll Get You" on the B-side. You see, Swan argued that they had the right to release "She Loves You" on a single, and the label argued that because "Sie Liebt Dich" is the same song (just in a different language), then they had the right to release it as a single. However, the folks at Swan obviously didn't feel like arguing that logic to the blokes at EMI, as there's no record that they ever asked for a copy of the master, and in fact the Swan single was a copy of an Odeon record from Germany -- which is why Swan's release of "Sie Liebt Dich" didn't sound terribly good! I do believe EMI issued a cease and desist to Swan, saying that Swan had the right to release the master of "She Loves You" as a single -- "Sie Liebt Dich" obviously was not the "She Loves You" master!

The next time we got to hear the song in the States was in 1980, on a Capitol Records compilation called Rarities, which included a stereo mix of the song. As with "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand," the stereo mix of "Sie Liebt Dich" pans the backing track to the left and the vocals to the right.

MONO VERSION:
MM:
There's definitely some emphasis on the bass on this version. In fact, the lows sound distorted, and the vocals sound distorted. No audible tape glitches; however, in some parts of the song, it sounds like the recording was mastered from a record, but in other parts the sound is pretty clean. The EQ definitely could benefit from some treble.

STEREO VERSIONS:
PM87:
What? You thought this was a mono version? Because it says that in the liner notes? And it sounds like mono to you? Well, apparently this is actually a very, very tight stereo mix. Sounds like mono to me. Oh well. EQ is okay, but it sounds like there are a lot of tape glitches. Actually, the last "Ooooooooooh!" does sound like it's isolated to the left channel.

PM09:
Definitely has a full, wide stereo separation. The instruments are hard-left, and the vocals are hard-right. The EQ is much better than on both MM and PM87, the vocals are much cleaner than on MM, and the tape glitches present on PM87 are gone here.

Worst version: Mono Masters
Because it's debatable as to whether the 1987 version is stereo or mono, I'm not doing a best/worst mono/stereo here. MM has absolutely the worst sound, period. The bass and vocals are darn near unlistenably distorted, and the equalization is terrible.

Definitive CD version of "Sie Liebt Dich": Past Masters (2009)
Bright sound throughout, no tape glitches, and no distortion. Yeah, the stereo separation makes for awkward listening -- especially with headphones -- but it's definitely the most enjoyable version.

I FEEL FINE

Yeah, yeah, accidental feedback, blah blah blah...but I hesitate to call it "feedback." True guitar feedback is definitely not anything like what's at the beginning of "I Feel Fine." I think what happened, rather, was that the plucking of Paul's A string on his bass was picked up by the A string on one of the other guitars, and because the two strings were perfectly in tune with each other, the 6-string's A-string started vibrating and ergo audibly sounded. That's not feedback, my friends. That's just plain cool. It's also what makes it possible for the human voice to break glass. But whatever caused this avant garde opening to happen, it certainly contributed greatly to what arguably could be considered a Perfect Beatles Song.

Yeah, it's great that September 9, 2009 saw the remastering of The Beatles' canonical catalog, but we still don't have the "whisper" version of "I Feel Fine" -- that is, the version that appeared on the European releases of the "red" album and on which you can hear some whispering before any music starts. Most references specify that it was the British version, but I have a red vinyl pressing from France that has the whispering at the beginning. Anyhoo....

MONO VERSIONS:
SINGLE:
It sounds to me as if the version in the singles box (which, I assume, is the same version used to press the original UK single) were mastered with A.M. radio in mind. I'm not saying this is a bad thing -- in fact, there's something exciting about this song. You can almost feel how exciting it was to hear this song coming out of a transistor radio. It's an amazingly clean recording; you can hear each instrument very distinctively. Yeah, there could be some more treble, but it's a damn fine recording nonetheless.

EP:
Sounds like there's less reverb in the intro. Definitely more bass than on the single version, maybe a bit more treble. Nice recording. Sounds like it might have been mastered with the home listener in mind rather than the A.M. radio listener, know what I mean? I guess you could say it sounds a bit more danceable than the single version.

CAPITOL (mono):
Holy reverb, Batman; The Fab Four must have recorded this in a cavern! Okay, this is one song from which Dave Dexter's engineering goons really should have stayed away. I don't know how to explain it, but the reverb makes this song sound less...real. Less honest. Think of a rainy day in New York City; that's what this version sounds like.

CAPITOL (fake stereo):
Oh, dear God, what did The Beatles do to deserve the hack job that Capitol did on this? And how dare they call it "stereo"?! Forgive Dave Dexter and his staff, Lord; they knew not what they did. Actually, scratch that -- please don't forgive them. Ouch. High/low fake stereo plus duophonic echo delay plus excessive reverb equals cheapening of The Beatles equals unhappy Sean. (Excuse me while I go clean out my ears, now; this bad fake stereo made my earwax run.)

MM:
*Whew!* Much better. This is by far the cleanest-sounding mono version, in that it's definitely not laden with noise reduction, no noticeable tape glitches, just very clean. You can actually hear the plectrum strike the strings on John's guitar right at the end of the instrumental break. However, the equalization needs help. As usual, more treble, please. The bass is pretty cool, though.

STEREO VERSIONS:
PM87:
Nice clean recording, could use a bit more EQ balance. "I Feel Fine" definitely sounds cool in stereo. I do wish the drums were a bit louder. The lead guitar overpowers everything during the instrumental break.

RED:
The vocals sound a bit brighter than on PM87. Lead guitar is still a bit overpowering, and I'm severely underwhelmed by the drums.

1:
The 1 version sounds incredibly bright and clean from the beginning. The bass is a little more pronounced than before. Drums are, thankfully, more audible; the overall stereo balance is a little better than on prior stereo CD releases. Brightness all around. John's vocals are so clear you can actually hear the saliva -- whether that's good or bad is up to you!

PM09:
Certainly an improvement over PM87 and the red album, but not over 1. The equalization isn't as good, and there's noticeably more hiss from the beginning and lasting all the way through. The balance isn't that great -- the vocals overpower the song, and most of the backing instruments are hard to hear; the exceptions, as usual, being John's and George's guitars.

Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1 (fake stereo)
Maybe it was Dave Dexter taking out his frustration on The Beatles? After all, he didn't want to sign them. Brian Epstein went over his head to his boss. That's the only logical explanation I can think of: revenge.

Best mono version: The Compact Disc EP Collection
Barely edging out Mono Masters, this version has the best overall sound, with the excitement jumping out quite well.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters Vol. 1 (1987)
Not the best sound in the world, and the guitars are too overpowering.

Best stereo version: 1
Best equalization, cleanest sound, and good balance of instruments plus vocals.

Definitive CD version of "I Feel Fine": 1
Hands-down, noticeably the best version all around.

SHE'S A WOMAN

The "I Feel Fine" / "She's A Woman" single combination is one of several that exemplifies an amazing pairing of John Lennon and Paul McCartney each saying the same thing in their own ways; if not lyrically, then musically. We had similar pairings with "Paperback Writer" and "Rain," "Hey Jude" and "Revolution," and perhaps most strikingly, "Penny Lane" and "Strawberry Fields Forever." This, ladies and gentleman, is a hell of a combo.

That's all I need to say, except that if you're an obsessive collector, there's an interesting outtake of "She's A Woman" on Unsurpassed Masters Vol. 2 that will make you think that Robert Plant took over the vocals at one point.

MONO VERSIONS:
SINGLE:
Right away I didn't care much for the sound. The intro chords sounded as if they were coming from a Hills Bros. coffee can. When the body of the song kicks in, though, the sound is a bit better, with a great bass line. As with many mono singles, it sounds as if it were mastered with A.M. radio in mind. Not the best EQ, but there is an overall good balance of all instruments and vocals.

CAPITOL (mono):
Again with the reverb, Capitol, what the hell?! EQ needs help, too -- too much high and middle, not enough low. All the reverb tends to drown out the piano. During the first refrain, somehow the vocals are noticeably overpowered; probably again blurred by the reverb.

CAPITOL (fake stereo):
Dave Dexter was a murderer; his engineers hit men. Need I say more?

MM:
This would be an amazing listen, if it only were for more treble in the equalization. It also sounds severely noise-reduced.

STEREO VERSIONS:
PM87:
Again, could use a bit more EQ balance. Interestingly, the vocals sound most affected by poor EQ. Most of the instruments and vocals balance nicely, but the maracas are too loud, and the piano is too quiet.

EP:
From the stereo bonus EP from the EP box, that is. The overall sound is a huge improvement over PM87. Also, we get something that's not on any other CD version legally released: a count-in. Maracas are still too loud and piano too soft, but still a good listening experience.

PM09:
Certainly the loudest-mastered of all the version, but still pretty good sound. The EQ isn't as good as on the EP version, but the sound itself is crisper and cleaner. The maracas aren't overpowering, and the piano is actually at a nice level.

Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1 (fake stereo)
Yuck. I think when it's my time to go, the first thing I'll do is find Dave Dexter and asked why, oh why he felt it necessary to slaughter a classic.

Best mono version: The Complete Singles Collection
Mono Masters would have won if it didn't sound so noise-reduced.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters Vol. 1 (1987)
Did people not believe in equalization?

Best stereo version: Past Masters (2009)
What put this over the top was the clean sound and even balance of all the elements of the song.

Definitive CD version of "She's A Woman": Past Masters (2009)
I think the mono version itself is more exciting, but the only way I could imagine that winning this contest is if you had a playback system that enables you to crank up the treble -- it truly is exciting. However, since not everybody has that luxury, I have to go with the version that sounds the best without any tweaking. The new Past Masters version wins.

The Beatles' Definitive CD Versions: The 1963 Singles

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Sun, 14 Mar 2010 00:27:00 -0500

So, I finally get a chance to analyze The Beatles' 1963 output in singles. It took a while, mainly because most of the single tracks have appeared on numerous Beatles CDs. Just to give you an idea of what I was dealing with, I have roughly a 45-minute commute home using the local mass transit system. Well, I worked on part of this project on the way home, and listening to "She Loves You" alone took almost the entire train ride. And I'm sure that if I had the headphones turned up loud enough, whoever was sitting next to me must have been ready to kill me.

For this round, I dealt with the following Beatles singles:

"From Me To You" b/w "Thank You, Girl"
"She Loves You" b/w "I'll Get You"
"I Want To Hold Your Hand" b/w "This Boy"

You may have noticed I left out "Please Please Me" b/w "Ask Me Why." I'll cover these when I take care of the Please Please Me album. But the six single tracks have been released on several different CD releases over the years; here's a guide to them and abbreviations I'll be using to keep things nice and tight:

PM87 - Past Masters, Vol. 1, compiled in 1987 and released in 1988 to include Beatles tracks that didn't appear on the canonical album catalog.

SINGLE - The Complete Singles Collection, a box set from 1992 that compiled all the Beatles' singles on mini-CDs, complete with reproductions of the picture sleeves.

EP - The Compact Disc EP Collection, just like the singles box but a compilation of EPs. The EPs that are apropos to this installment of my obsessive analysis are The Beatles' Hits, The Beatles' Million Sellers, and a "bonus" EP included in the set of stereo mixes, simply titled The Beatles.

RED - the "red album," officially called 1962-1966 and sold as a two-CD set in 1993 despite the ability to easily fit the entire contents on one CD.

CAPITOL (mono) - mono mixes from The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1 from 2004. Albums within this set that apply to this entry are Meet The Beatles! and The Beatles' Second Album.

CAPITOL (fake stereo) - Back in the '60s, if a stereo mix wasn't available for a song, engineers would apply crazy EQ and other effects to simulate stereo, and the result was usually atrocious. The "fake stereo" designation will refer to any tracks from The Capitol Albums from the "stereo" albums but are really processed mono. When I compare "best mono," "best stereo," etc. versions, anything that's actually fake stereo will be considered mono.
CAPITOL (stereo) - if you can't figure out what I mean by this after reading my explanations for the other two Capitol designations, then you really need to put down the joint and come back after you sober up.

1 - the 2000 album that compiled the officially-recognized #1 hits from The Beatles in both the U.S. and U.K. Beatles fans the world over knew this album would be a huge flop (case in point: 1982's 20 Greatest Hits). Check the RIAA site to see what a flop it was.

MM - Mono Masters, the mono equivalent to Past Masters found in the box set The Beatles In Mono.

PM09 - Past Masters, 2009 edition, the two-volume remastered version.

Now, on to the music; if you want the extremely lengthy details, click here:

FROM ME TO YOU

Worst mono version: Past Masters, Vol. 1 (1987)
Just plain bad sound.

Best mono version: 1
Quite simply, this version has the best EQ and overall sound clarity.

Definitive CD version of "From Me To You": Past Masters (2009)
There was something I always loved about the reverb on the stereo version. It's hard to describe, but it sounds different from any other reverb that I've heard on any other Beatles song. Plus, the sound on the stereo Past Masters is very clean; really, you'd think it was mastered by Paul's grandfather.

THANK YOU, GIRL

Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1
Partly because it sounds like it was recorded in a can of sardines, and partly because it's a fake mono mix, in that Dave Dexter's goons just took the stereo mix and combined the two channels to make a mono version. Boooooooo!

Best mono version: The Compact Disc EP Collection
Best EQ overall and with the least amount of distracting noise and tape glitches.

Stereo Versions
CAPITOL (stereo)
Okay, the overall sound is just plain harsh. The EQ isn't all that great, and there's too much extra reverb. Not good! Also, the playback is slow and makes the song drag a bit.

PM09:
Much cleaner stereo mix than Capitol's. Still not great, but much more enjoyable.

Definitive CD version of "Thank You, Girl": Past Masters (2009)
But admittedly, not by far. I think the overall balance sounds better on the mono mix, but the stereo version sounds cleaner, brighter, and has the harmonica parts that make the sound as a whole complete.

SHE LOVES YOU

Worst version: 1
The sudden EQ change on the "pride" edit, resulting in the sound being severely marred for the remainder of the song, make this probably the least-desirable CD version of "She Loves You."

Definitive CD version of "She Loves You": Past Masters (2009)
I think I had to judge this one on cleanliness. The various versions of "She Loves You" sound good, but unfortunately not great. Also, this one has the smoothest edits and the least drastic changes in equalization after the "pride" edit.

I'LL GET YOU

Overall, there isn't really a great-sounding version of "I'll Get You," which is a shame because it's a good song. I'd love to have a version that has the EQ of the Capitol fake stereo with the cleanliness of the single version.

Worst version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1
The EQ leaves much to be desired, and the extra reverb doesn't help, nor does the relative loudness.

Definitive CD version of "I'll Get You": The CD Singles Collection
But not by far, honestly.

I WANT TO HOLD YOUR HAND

Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1
That is, the so-called "stereo" version from Meet The Beatles! The "Dexterization" absolutely adds nothing.

Best mono version: The Compact Disc EP Collection
Taken from The Beatles' Million Sellers. Nice EQ, nice mix, almost makes me want to get up and dance -- and let me tell ya, I do not dance.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters Vol. 1 (1987)
Just a lifeless recording with vocals and lead guitar that are way too loud.

Best stereo version: Past Masters (2009)
I think a good way to describe this version is this: Take the best mono mix and make it stereo. Good sound all around, and definitely the most exciting-sounding stereo version that's ever been officially released by EMI on CD.

Definitive CD version of "I Want To Hold Your Hand": The Compact Disc EP Collection
Mind you, since 1988 the stereo version has been drilled into me. It's what was on the CD (remember, the original Past Masters came out in 1988, not 1987, although it was mixed in 1987), and ergo it's also what's been played on the radio ever since. But the mono mix definitely has the edge. Remember, "I Want To Hold Your Hand" was the first song The Beatles ever recorded on a 4-track tape, so the folks at Abbey Road were just learning how to record with it. As a result, we don't have the best balance, so the true stereo mixes have to be pretty primitive.

The mono versions, though, wow. I think my first exposure to a true mono version of "I Want To Hold Your Hand" was when I got The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1, and I listened to the mono Meet The Beatles! in my car on my way home from work. Mind you, I was not quite 30 years old at the time, but I'd been familiar with "I Want To Hold Your Hand" all my life -- I heard it everywhere: the radio, music systems in stores, lip-sync competitions (I grew up in the '80s), you name it...and to be honest with you, I got sick of it long before I became a Beatles fan in 1987. But when I heard the mono Meet The Beatles! on CD, I turned the volume up. Just the excitement...forget the lyrics, it was the music that was making the statement -- and what a statement it was. I suddenly understood what it must have been like to be a Beatlemaniac in 1964, and it only took me 17 years of being a Beatles fan to do that.

THIS BOY

Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1
Specifically, I'm referring to the "stereo" mix of Meet The Beatles!
Just no. That's all I have to say.

Best mono version: Past Masters (2009)
This was a tough one. I prefer the EQ on the mono Capitol version, but I think I had to go with cleanliness, as the various elements on the recording on PM09 sound cleaner, while the Capitol version has tape glitches (not to mention a lower tape generation).

Worst stereo version: Past Masters, Vol. 1 (1987)
It's not so much that it's a bad version, just the least-good. The truth is that all the stereo versions sound very nice and are pretty clean.

Best stereo version: Past Masters (2009)
Good EQ, crisp sound throughout, and a good balance make this the best of the three stereo versions we've been given over the years.

Definitive CD version of "This Boy": Past Masters (2009)
Yes, the stereo mix has all the vocals panned to one side, which is generally frowned upon, but you know what? The newest stereo release of the song has the brightest sound and, to my ears, was the most pleasant listen of the seven versions that have been released on CD.

The Beatles' Definitive CD Versions: "Love Me Do" with Ringo on Drums

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Sat, 6 Mar 2010 00:33:00 -0500

In the second installment of my project to determine what, in my opinion, are the definitive CD editions of each song in The Beatles' official cannon, I figured I'd keep it easy by exploring the September 4, 1962 version of "Love Me Do" and the non-album singles from 1963. Or...at least I thought it'd be easy until I realized that a few of these songs appear on many different CDs. And on top of that, this installment would cover a lot of Beatles songs: "Love Me Do," "From Me To You," "Thank You, Girl," "She Loves You," "I'll Get You," "I Want To Hold Your Hand," and "This Boy." Wow. I think I'll just stick with "Love Me Do" for now and get back to the singles later. (This is a short enough read that I'll include all my notes and not just the rankings.)

And the first time around, it got pretty aggravating pretty fast typing out "The Compact Disc E.P. Collection" ad nauseam, so from now on I'll use some shorthand. Here's a guide to this entry's abbreviations:

MM: Mono Masters (2009)
PM87: Past Masters Vol. 1, 1987 edition
PM09: Past Masters, 2009 edition

The lineup for this version of "Love Me Do" was the classic Beatles lineup we all know. The Beatles recorded this version, and a week later re-recorded it but with Andy White on drums; Ringo was handed a tambourine. (George Martin always said that the Andy White version came first, but photographs and studio documentation published in many books reveal that the Ringo version actually came first.) Because these two versions are actually completely different performances, I will hold off on the Andy White version until I run though the Please Please Me album.

Personally, I much prefer the Ringo-on-drums version. The overall flow is much smoother than on the rather clunky and fussy performance with Andy White. The bass is much louder and provides a better groove, and the handclaps in the instrumental break give the song a little extra boost missing in the Andy White version. However, George Martin didn't like the outcome of September 4 (perhaps partly because of McCartney's obvious stage fright clearly heard in his first warbly solo line of "love me do-ooo"), so he had the guys rerecord it. The Ringo version was briefly released as a single in the U.K. on Parlophone and in Canada on Capitol of Canada. Some sources say that the Ringo version was released at all was an accident on EMI's part, and as a result they destroyed its master tape to ensure that all future releases of "Love Me Do" would be the Andy White version. Thankfully, some fairly clean vinyl (or polystyrene?) copies of the Ringo version survived, and years later a new master was made from a pristine-condition Capitol of Canada single. If I'm not mistaken, all CD releases of the Ringo version are from an even newer master made from a different copy of the single.

Having said that, "Love Me Do" pre-dates EMI's policy of not destroying session tapes. Once the mono mix was made, the multitrack session tapes were destroyed or erased for later re-use, which means that with today's technology, a stereo mix is physically impossible. So there will be no mono-stereo comparison here. But let's get down to the three different CD releases.

First of all, it surprises me that the Ringo version was not the version used in the singles box set; this means there were fewer versions for me to listen to. The September 4 recording of "Love Me Do," therefore, has only been released on three CDs so far: the original Past Masters compilation of 1987, its 2009 reissue, and the Mono Masters 2-CD set included in the box set The Beatles In Mono.

As for each version:

PM87: Even with 1987 CD technology, it's really amazing to hear just how clear the song is. Really, it's amazingly clear for being mastered from a 7-inch record pressed in 1962! There are a few spots that sound like dropouts, most likely from a tape (or record) error. I noticed for the first time that during the fade-out, after the last time we hear McCartney sing, all the sound abruptly cuts off.

MM: Overall the sound is better. The equalization is brighter, with more treble than before; unfortunately, the additional treble exposes some tape hiss, but it does make the song sound punchier. Somehow, the vocals actually sound clearer than before. The recording in general sounds cleaner, with no noticeable tape flaws. And was that an edit I heard after the instrumental break (performed, of course, with a shoplifted chromatic harmonica)? The fade-out doesn't cut out as abruptly.

PM09: What's this? Both the Mono Masters and Past Masters are in mono, and since they're both part of the same reissue campaign, logic tells us these are the exact same track, so why am I bothering to waste my time listening to each and writing about them? Well, dig this: they are not the same. First of all, the new Past Masters version is actually noticeably louder than the Mono Masters version. Second, the treble is up even more than on Mono Masters, making the harmonica solo quite harsh to listen to, especially with headphones. Third of all, the abrupt halt during the fade-out is back. And if you're of the mindset that it's only my mind and ears telling me that both 2009 versions are not the same, please note that each has a different playing time.

Worst Version: Past Masters (1987)

I was having a hard time with this one. I was actually about to declare the new Past Masters version to be the worst, due to the piercing EQ on the harmonica solo, and the fact that it was considerably louder than the other two versions...but then I remembered there's such a thing as a volume control, and nobody's stopping me from turning the volume down. So, I decided that a harsh harmonica solo for a few seconds was better than tape glitches.

Definitive Version: Mono Masters

Clean sound, bright EQ, clear vocals, no tape flaws, and what may or may not be an audible edit (fun for people who like to listen for this stuff!) put this version of The Beatles' Everly Brothers tribute over the top.

The Beatles' Definitive CD Versions: the Long Tall Sally E.P.

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Tue, 2 Mar 2010 22:46:00 -0500

(This is, believe it or not, the short version. If you want to read my exhaustive notes on each track, click on this link. It will be a VERY long and pointy-headed read!)

In my first post detailing my mission to seek out the definitive legally-released CD version of each Beatles song, I started with the 1964 EP Long Tall Sally. There have been so far six legally-released CD versions of the four songs that comprise this EP, all of which I auditioned for this project:

Past Masters, Vol. 1(compiled in 1987)

The Compact Disc E.P. Collection (1992)

The Capitol Albums, Volume 1 (2004) -- mono and stereo versions are included in this set

Mono Masters (2009, part of the box set The Beatles In Mono)

Past Masters (2009 remastered versions)

Now, without further ado, here are what I consider to be the best and worst mono, best and worst stereo, and overall definitive versions of each of the songs:

Long Tall Sally
Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. I hate to call it "worst" because it's still good. But it doesn't have the oomph of the E.P. box version or the cleanliness of the 2009 version.

Best mono version: Compact Disc E.P. Collection. Probably the most enjoyable of the three. None is actually bad at all.
Worst stereo version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. I'm wondering if the reason, in 2004, when I heard the Capitol box set, if my mind didn't tell me that it sounds better than the 1987 CDs simply because I was very prejudiced against the sound of the 1987 CDs. Hate to say it, but the 2004 release actually sounds even worse than the 1987 one. The added reverb would have been great if it weren't for the loss of tape generation.

Best stereo version: Past Masters (2009). Thing is, though, upon close inspection, the stereo versions aren't all that great. But the newest release is the best.

Definitive CD version of "Long Tall Sally": Compact Disc E.P. Collection. First of all, mono wins out because the mono mix really emphasizes the kick-ass drumming at the end; the stereo mixes seem to bury the drumming. The not-to-be-missed driving bass line emphasized by the E.P. box mix put this version over the top.

I Call Your Name

Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. The quality itself is almost identical to that of the E.P. box, but the playback is a bit slower than usual, making it sound a bit plodding.

Best mono version: Compact Disc E.P. Collection. While the 2009 version is definitely the cleanest, it just seems that the E.P. version has a lot more punch and really grabs the listener. Again, points for emphasizing the bass line.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters, Vol. 1 (1987). The bass is mixed too far down to really enjoy the groove on this version; plus, you can hear John popping his P's a bit too much.

Best stereo version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. I'm sure my opinion here will anger the purists. How dare I choose the "Dexterized," second-generation version over the purer, first-generation version! Yes, the actual audio quality of the 2009 remaster is noticeably better, but believe it or not, Dexter's remixing goons actually did make this track more exciting.

Definitive CD version of "I Call Your Name": stereo mix on The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. Wow, I'm really putting my life in jeopardy, picking the manipulated version! But my ears, attitude, and just personal taste make me pick this version. One thing you gotta admit: on the earlier tunes the Beatles did, the bass line really is the driving force, and this version really brings out the bass line. What? The mono versions do, too? Well, truth be told, while "I Call Your Name" really is an excellent song (and in my opinion very underrated), the mono versions (and in fact, most versions) are performance and production nightmares, what with George's sloppy 12-stringing in the intro, the noticeable edits, and the double-tracking inconsistencies. The stereo versions have slightly better performances, and Capitol's reverb-laden version has perhaps the most driving groove of the six CD versions.

Slow Down

Worst mono version: The Compact Disc E.P. Collection. Really, the mix doesn't sound enjoyable at all. There's just something not right about it.

Best mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. It was tough to decide between this and Mono Masters. To be honest with you, none of the mono versions sound particularly exciting to me. Yeah, the 2009 remaster doesn't seem to have the tape glitches that the Capitol version has, but the 2009 version is almost missing entirely an essential element of the song: the rousing piano overdub. My decision here wasn't so much which mono version was the best, but which one was the least bad.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters, Vol. 1. Too much piano and guitar solo, not enough everything else. The overall sound is just plain lifeless.

Best stereo version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. Another track noticeably "Dexterized," but somehow the Dexterization actually made the sound a little bit brighter than the other two versions. The EQ is slightly better as well.

Definitive CD version of "Slow Down": stereo mix on The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. To be honest, none of the six versions sound particularly exciting, which is a shame considering how "Slow Down" is one of the finest covers in the Beatles' catalog. The bass is really lacking, but the American stereo version does the best it can with it. The mono versions really lack punch.

Matchbox

Worst mono version: Compact Disc E.P. Collection. EQ leaves a lot to be desired, and the phasing might be distracting to some listeners, especially with headphones on.

Best mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. Still not a great mix, but the EQ is slightly better, and the phasing errors seem to be gone.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters Vol. 1 (1987). Truth be told, none of the stereo versions actually sound bad, but this is the least-good sounding of all three. Still an enjoyable listen.

Best stereo version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. To be honest, this was a tough call. The 2009 remaster sounds great, but the EQ on the Capitol version sounds a little bit brighter, pushing it over the edge.

Definitive CD version of "Matchbox": stereo version on The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. Stereo wins out over mono, period, for several reasons, The mix is brighter in stereo. The mono mixes have some tape phasing that was obviously a technical error. Parts of George's guitar solo sound flawed in mono, but fixed in stereo. Finally, the atrocious double-tracking "puppy dog" error in mono is fixed in stereo. Yep, the mono version has a lot of errors -- yet George Martin and the Beatles themselves want us to believe the mono versions are definitive? The errors are definitive?? Admittedly, listening for the mistakes is a favorite part of listening to Beatles songs for hard-core fans, including myself. But as a whole, the stereo version wins out. Believe it or not, the Capitol version has overall the best sound, with the 2009 stereo remaster coming in a close second.

The Beatles: The Definitive Versions?

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 23:19:00 -0500

Effective a couple of weeks ago, I now have all of the new Beatles CDs that came out on September 9 -- mono and stereo. So now I can begin my Beatles project:

determining the definitive CD versions of every single Beatles song (at least from the core collection of the albums Please Please Me through Let It Be).

I should add that I mean legitimate CD releases. I'm not talking about the home-made desktop pirate remasters from Mirrorspock, Dr. Ebbetts, Purple Chick, and whatever else have you. I'm talking stuff you could walk into any record/CD store and buy legally at some point in history. Perhaps I will try to do a comparison of all the "underground" remasters, needledrops, etc., and then perhaps have a show-down between the best of the pirates and the best of the legits. But man, that's going to be a lo-o-o-o-o-o-o-ong time coming.

I'm not counting Anthology, though, as that series pretty much consists of outtakes. I'm talking about actual final official takes. That means that Yellow Submarine Songtrack is fair game: they're the same exact recordings, just new mixes.

So, this all means that all of the following releases will be used for this intense study:

The original 1987 CD releases of the standard albums I mentioned before

The 2009 remastered reissues, both mono and stereo

"new generation" Beatles compilations on CD, such as Yellow Submarine Songtrack, 1, and perhaps any of the few tracks on the Love that were simply remixed and not mashed up.

The Beatles tracks on the Imagine: John Lennon soundtrack

The Complete Compact Disc EP Collection -- word is that these 1992 CDs sounded a bit better than the 1987 CDs. Is everybody right? :)

Of course, The Complete Compact Disc Singles Collection, for the same reason.

The CD reissues of the "red" and "blue" albums

The 1983 Toshiba release of Abbey Road. Yes, technically it wasn't a totally legit CD, but it was available as a mainstream CD until EMI got all legal-like on 'em, reminding Toshiba that they only had the rights to put it out on cassette.

The two The Capitol Albums box sets

And let's not forget the 1987 and 2009 CDs of Past Masters and Mono Masters.

Now, what I'm really struggling with is what to do about the Let It Be album. I'm trying to ponder whether I should include Let It Be...Naked. The Let It Be album was highly unusual in that it wasn't recorded in a formal way; most fans know the complicated story of this album. And what about the single versions of "Let It Be" and "Get Back," produced by George Martin -- is it fair to put them against the Phil Spector productions? Are they too different? And if I do include Let It Be...Naked in the running, should I also include the Let It Be outtakes that are on Anthology 3?

Anyway, I know one thing for sure: I'm going to start off easy. I'll start with the Long Tall Sally EP released in the United Kingdom in 1964. With only four tracks, Long Tall Sally will be a fairly not-so-involved study. The contents:

Long Tall Sally
I Call Your Name
Slow Down
Matchbox

That's a heck of a lineup, really -- three great covers (at least two of which were recorded and nailed in one take) and a unique Lennon original with a ska break. Now, to do this study of Long Tall Sally, I will be listening to the following CDs:

Past Masters Vol. 1 from 1987
Mono Masters
Past Masters from 2009
The Long Tall Sally disc from The Compact Disc EP Collection
Second Album (both mono and stereo) from The Capitol Albums Vol. 1
Something New (both mono and stereo) from The Capitol Albums Vol. 1

So, yeah. Every bullet point you see represents one CD. Not all four songs are on all CDs, though -- let's remember that the contents of the EP are spread over two different US albums. But even with just four songs, it's still a lot of listening.

Oh...and okay, I use the term "CD" loosely...I'll actually be using my iPod, as that's my main way of listening to music these days. (Let's face it, it's a lot easier than carrying a CD player and a bunch of CDs around all day!) I have ripped all this material in Apple Lossless format and will be listening through a $25 pair of Sony studio-style headphones that have really good frequency response; they're also good at blocking out sound. The iPod in question is a current-generation 160-gigabyte iPod Classic, using the Apple factory-installed operating system. (Besides, I don't think RockBox is yet compatible anyway.) The EQ will be set to "Rock," which I find is the optimal setting for almost all music I've ever heard through an iPod. I may or may not use "Treble Boost" for the mono albums to compensate for their lack of treble.

The CD ripping was done with a piece of software called Max via my MacBook. Max is a good ripping program -- it has a lot of error correction, unlike iTunes, which is the worst program to use for ripping. (The best, for the record, is Exact Audio Copy for PCs. It's very unforgiving. But I really didn't want to boot my PC for this project; besides, I take good enough care of my CDs that Max should have no problem at all.)

I think what I'll do is determine first of all what the definitive mono version is, what the definitive stereo version is, and which of those two I deem the more definitive.

Please understand that I recognize that at best this is a very, very obsessive project, and I'm sure that if I weren't already married, this would pretty much guarantee that I'd remain a lifelong bachelor eating stale tiramisu under a bare lightbulb while wearing nothing but underwear. And at worst, this is a highly controversial project that will make me look like a pompous ass (more than I already am, that is) and will more than likely incite war among pointy-headed Beatles fans.

Let the insanity begin.

Now that the Beatles' mainstream catalog is remastered, what's still missing?

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 15:45:00 -0500

So, September 9 has come and gone, and plenty of time has passed for us fans to absorb and enjoy the new stereo and mono remasters. We can now buy all the Beatles' core collection of albums in stereo and mono, and in two cases, two different stereo mixes.

Of course, there's still a lot that's not out yet. Pointy-headed fans like me find it to be a huge, gaping hole; other fans may find the gap trivial at best; and casual listeners just don't care.

So, what's still missing? Well, there are things that we still don't have on CD but have been released, as well as stuff still in the vaults that could easily fill at least one CD.

Please be assured this is not meant to come across as a complaint essay; rather, just an enumeration of what is still begging for an audio release.

Here's what we're missing, starting with...

Released Tracks Yet To Appear (legally) On CD
Mind you, I'm only referring to material that is officially in the hands of Apple, EMI, Capitol, etc. Let's disregard, for now, the Star-Club tapes, the Decca audition, the Tony Sheridan recordings (which are available in full anyway on the Hamburg Days compilations), and videos. I'm just talking audio.

The Beatles' Christmas Album -- Why has this not been available legally since 1970? 'Nuff said.

The Capitol Albums, Vol. 3 -- In 2004, two box sets containing eight U.S. Capitol albums were released. We're still missing some key albums. "Yesterday"...and Today contained some mixes that you can't get on any other album, particularly the odd "I'm Only Sleeping" mixes. There's an entire pressing of the U.S. version of Rubber Soul, made at Capitol's East Coast facility, that has reverb all the way through; this version was not used in The Capitol Albums. People argue for the release of the U.S. version of A Hard Day's Night, arguing that although United Artists originally released the album, Capitol reissued it. And what about The Beatles' Story? And a big, gaping hole: At The Hollywood Bowl.

Some argue for the release of the Rock And Roll Music albums for the new mixes. Okay, but the problem is that the remixes were done from the final stereo mixes: George Martin took the existing U.S. stereo mixes, flip-flopped the stereo channels for some reason, added reverb, and in some cases attempted to center any panned vocals. Should this be a release candidate for CD? Maybe, maybe not.

But most of the tracks that are still missing from the Beatles' CD catalog are those that have been scattered about various global releases of Beatles compilations:

"Strawberry Fields Forever" -- I became a Beatles fan in 1987, and before everything was available on CD. My first exposure to this song was a stereo vinyl copy of Magical Mystery Tour on Capitol. However, since the Beatles' catalog was officially released in 1987, the German stereo mix of the album on the Odeon label was declared to be the official version. Now, this was a good idea, because the German mix was the first version to have true stereo versions of "Penny Lane" and "Baby, You're A Rich Man" instead of that godawful highs-in-one-channel, lows-in-the-other fake stereo. "Strawberry Fields Forever," although always available in stereo, now sounded different, however. What's cool is that the German mix is a bit longer, meaning that we hear John say "cranberry sauce" twice. Unfortunately, the vocals in this mix are pretty dry; the version I first became familiar with had slightly reverbed vocals that added a bit to the trippiness of the lyrics.

"I Should Have Known Better" in stereo -- The standard stereo mix has the famous harmonica drop-out in the intro. However, in 1982, the Reel Music compilation fixes this mistake. The completist will want both versions. Which brings me to...

"Day Tripper" -- The version that's been available on CD since 1987 -- on both the original and 2009 releases -- fixes the famous instrumental dropout of the third verse, much to many fans' chagrin. So...why did the powers-that-be fix that error but not the "I Should Have Known Better" harmonica error? Let's have 'em both!

"And I Love Her" -- What about the longer stereo mix from the Odeon version of Something New that has the main riff iterated six times at the end instead of four?

"Penny Lane" -- we have two different versions with the piccolo trumpet ending that have yet to appear on CD: the original mono mix used as a promo single, and a stereo mix done years later that has the trumpet ending tacked on. Why not put one -- or both -- of these on a buyable CD?

"I Am The Walrus" -- admittedly, there are more variations of this song than you can shake a stick at. To this day, I don't think there's a version on a legal CD that contains the extra beats between "I'm crying" and "yellow matter custard." Mono or stereo.

"All My Loving" -- we're still missing the version with the five-high-hat-tap intro.

"I Feel Fine" -- yep, the infamous "whisper version" found on European vinyl pressings of 1962-1966.

"A Hard Day's Night" -- there's a version of this song that, believe it or not, has only been released on 8-track tape. The last line is repeated several more times.

So, these are at least the highlights that I can think of, so now let's consider:

Tracks Yet To Appear (legally) On Any Audio Release
A Facebook friend recently commented that while the remasters are nice to have, Apple needs to release more unreleased stuff. I commented that they pretty much did release everything releasable, that everything else is pretty much bottom-of-the-barrel. He said I was kind of harsh with that statement, so I decided to reevaluate things that I've read about, heard on Beatles radio specials, and heard on various bootlegs.

First off, I was shocked at the 1968 demos recorded at Esher that did not make it to Anthology 3. Why no "Child of Nature?" Fans would have eaten it right up, hearing an early version of "Jealous Guy." What about "Circles?" And "Sour Milk Sea?"

Live At The BBC, Volume 2 -- Not that there necessarily was a second volume planned, but it has been approximated that there are at least 30 unique songs not included in the original collection that could make up a second volume.

"It's All Too Much" -- Somehow, the version in the movie Yellow Submarine with the "time for me to look at you" verse has inexplicably escaped legal audio release, including Yellow Submarine Songtrack.

"You Know My Name, Look Up The Number" -- Although there's a stereo mix on Anthology 2, we don't have a stereo mix of the single version. The original tapes still exist, so there's no reason this shouldn't eventually see a release.

"This Boy" -- According to Mark Lewisohn's must-own book Recording Sessions, "This Boy" was recorded with a complete ending, although the released version fades out. Heck, even the outtake released on the Real Love E.P. fades out. Let's have a studio version that comes to a complete ending.

"Strawberry Fields Forever" -- version 1 -- As most fans know, the "Strawberry Fields Forever" we all know and love is a combination of versions 2 and 3 as recorded in the studio. Version 1 has been heavily bootlegged in pristine sound quality, and it actually saw a legal release in 1995 on the Anthology 2 release; however, Apple inexplicably mixed out the nice background harmonies. Let's get a release with the missing background harmony vocals!

"Let It Be" -- Yeah, I know, we already have about seventeen different versions to pick one; problem is, none of those versions contain the line "There will be no sorrow," recorded in the basement of Apple Records on January 31, 1969, and as seen in the movie of the same title. The lyrics work better, IMHO, at the very least because they rhyme and have a nice message.

"Get Back" -- So, we have "I Want To Hold Your Hand" and "She Loves You" in German, and if you want to go outside of what Apple controls, we also have a legally-released version of "My Bonnie" in which Tony Sheridan sings the intro in German. Well, in the vaults exists a version of "Get Back" sung in (most likely intentionally badly faked) German and French. Let's round out the Foreign Fab Four collection!

"Tip Of My Tongue" -- Lewisohn doesn't make it clear as to whether this 1962 outtake still exists in the vaults, but if it does, it'd probably make an interesting addition to a Beatles compilation, if not (according to Lewisohn) a very, very bad one.

"Helter Skelter" -- yes, the 27-minute version, which I admit I'm only mentioning because so many fans are rabid for this elusive track that hasn't even made its way to a bootleg yet. Mind you, it's an earlier version than what was released, and we were given a sample of an early version of "Helter Skelter" on Anthology 3. And you know what? That early version was B-O-R-I-N-G. I suspect the 27-minute version might be along those same lines, so I for one am not foaming at the mouth in anticipation of its eventual release. (Mind you, I'm not saying I won't be running out to buy it if it does see a legal release!)

"Revolution 1" -- Of course, I'm talking about the extended version that goes on for several additional minutes. It recently leaked out over the Internet, so naturally this would be a natural track for a boot killer.

"Goodbye" -- Apple's reason for not including this nice demo on Anthology 3 was that it's a McCartney solo demo, not a demo for the group. But that doesn't explain why they did include his demo for "Come And Get It," recorded for reference for Badfinger.

"That Means A Lot" -- Apple did release arguably the better version on Anthology, but there's a re-make sitting in the vaults as well. Maybe good for historic purposes, but admittedly not for entertainment purposes.

"Bad To Me" -- How did Anthology 1 manage to get released without John's demo?

"Christmas Time (Is Here Again)" -- This is mainly for the fans who want the 27-minute "Helter Skelter." People like that will also want the complete, unedited version of this 1967 song.

"Rocker" -- a short track that's really Fats Domino's "I'm Ready." Because it was included in both of Glyn Johns' proposed lineups for the Get Back album, this is arguably a historically important unreleased track.

"Isn't It A Pity" -- Apple gave us George's demos of "Something" and "All Things Must Pass" on Anthology 3, so why did they leave this one out?

"Besame Mucho" -- On gray-market releases, we have the Decca audition version as well as a performance from the Star-Club. On Anthology 1, we have the version from the June 1962 EMI audition/recording session. I can think of two reasons to release the silly Let It Be-era version: 1) when the Let It Be album was released, it included "Across The Universe," which the Beatles did not formally record during those sessions, but they were seen playing it in the movie when they were rehearsing at Twickenham (ditto "I, Me, Mine"); and 2) Beatles fans can make their own montages that demonstrate some sort of insane evolution of the Beatles performing this song.

"Love Me Do" -- So, we have the single version, the album version, the Pete Best version, and a BBC version. It only makes sense to release yet another version! Much has been written about the slower, bluesier version recorded in January 1969 during the Let It Be sessions, so why not release it?

"Dig It" -- yet another for the obsessive completists; nay, two for the obsessive completists: the 12-minute jam partially shown in the movie Let It Be (edited down to five minutes by Glyn Johns, then under a minute by Phil Spector), and the other "Dig It" song from the same time, "Can You Dig It," the original source of the "Georgie Wood" dialog.

"Her Majesty" -- Okay, everybody, say it with me: "Missing final chord."

Candlestick Park 1966 concert -- Now, this is where things get a bit questionable, admittedly. No Beatles fan can deny the importance of this historic concert. It was not recorded formally, but a press agent was in the crowd recording it on a portable tape recorder, sometimes interjecting comments. That tape has made the rounds on bootlegs. I say, it might be a good idea to make this available perhaps as a download for the true die-hard fans for historic purposes. Word on the street is that after The Beatles finished performing "Long Tall Sally," John played the opening riff of "In My Life" before they all left the stage; if true, what a bittersweet way to end a touring career. Too bad the tape ran out before this moment happened.

"Something" -- with the little vamp-jam at the end.

"Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds" -- in the vaults exists a mono mix with the first half of the first verse sung by no other than...Jeremy Hillary Boob! I think Apple missed a big opportunity by not including this on the Songtrack.

"Dear Prudence" -- with a clean opening. The song is just too good only to be available with a jet engine interfering with the intro.

That's all I can think of at this point. I'm sure many will comment on this with some criticism and an endless supply of "What about [x] song?" ponderings, but hey, it's what I could do before falling asleep. Time now for bed before either my wife wakes up wondering where I am or the sun comes up, whichever comes first.

Musician Survey CORRECTED

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:48:00 -0400

Another Facebook note I stole from a friend...well, not really stole, I WAS tagged!

Anyhoo....

** This one's for all you musicians out there. Answer the questions below, then tag your other musician friends so they can do the same! **

(Well, a huge segment of my friends are musicians, so rather than tag everyone...you know who you are.)

What is your main instrument?
Guitar

Other instruments?
Bass, some piano, some blues harp

Any instruments you want to play but never tried?
Theremin

How many years have you played your main instrument?
22

Did you take lessons or teach yourself?
Guitar/bass -- self-taught, although I recently took a fingerboard theory class.
Piano -- took lessons throughout college.
Blues harp -- took several blues harp classes.

Do you read sheet music or play by ear?
I CAN read sheet music and tablatures, but very slowly. I prefer by ear.

How many hours a day do you practice?
Not enough, that's for sure.

Do you write your own music?
Yes.

Do you prefer to play solo or in a group?
Usually solo, mainly because I don't have a band! I would love to have free access to an orchestra, though, because I have an arrangement of "Cuddle Up" I'd love to record some day. And most of the stuff I compose I have an entire band in mind.

In one of the blues harp classes I took, the beginning of class was an electrified jam, complete with a three-piece band. It's REALLY COOL to have a band back you up as you play Little Walter tunes on a harmonica.

Are you currently in a band?
Nope.

What was the name of your first band?
If you count the Joliet Catholic liturgy committee music group as a band, we called ourselves "Holy Jam" because we thought that name sounded cool.

If you count the band idea I have in my head that currently only has one member, no gigs, and only incomplete material, then Scattered Frog.

Who is your favorite all-time artist/band?
Artist -- Brian Wilson; band -- Beatles

Who is your favorite current artist/band?
Artist -- I would love to say Logan Whitehurst, but he died a few years ago at the age of 29, so I don't know if he counts as "current." Band -- Wondermints, although they haven't really released an album in a while.

Who is/was your greatest musical influence?
Wow...too hard to articulate...I'd love to say Brian Wilson or Lennon/McCartney, but none of my stuff sounds anything remotely like theirs. Recently I've been getting some ideas from John Prine and some local groups.

Who is your favorite musical innovator?
The staff at EMI Studios at #3 Abbey Road, circa 1962-1969. Flanging, artificial double-tracking, backwards music as an instrument, tape loops, Leslie speakers on everything...

Favorite female vocalist?
Time to embarrass a friend: my friend Bridget. Amazing voice!! She sang at my wedding. Seriously, I was more nervous asking her to sing at my wedding than I was asking Lisa to marry me!

Favorite male vocalist?
Hmmm...dunno...definitely not ME! Possibly Stevie Wonder. I'd love to have the pipes of Carl Wilson, or even a really really young Frank Sinatra.

Favorite guitar player?
Too many to pick from...Dick Dale is definitely up there, and perhaps one of the most amazing guitarists I've ever seen, either in person or on record (and in this case both), is Phil Keaggy.

Favorite bass player?
Carol Kaye, James Jamerson, and because people yelled at me for not including him the first time around, Paul McCartney

Favorite keyboard player?
Dunno; never really followed keyboard players...

Favorite drummer?
Keith Moon, by far.

Most underrated artist/band of all-time?
Wondermints

Most underrated current artist/band?
Any band Stew happens to take part in.

Most overrated artist/band of all-time?
Led Zeppelin, post-Syd Barrett-era Pink Floyd

Most overrated current artist/band?
Rascal Flatts

Which artist/band would your friends be most surprised you like?
Justin Timberlake -- at least, the hits from Justified. That stuff sounds like classic Stevie Wonder infused with Michael Jackson's Off The Wall.

Which artist/band would your friends be most surprised you dislike?
The Raspberries. Most of my Brian Wilson fan friends gasp in shock when I express my extreme loathing of that whiny-ass music. Then again, I think it's more that there's this Beatles envy among Beach Boys/Brian Wilson fans that drives people to attack anybody who mentions the Beatles and saying they're off-topic in the online fan discussions, yet threads about the f**king Raspberries go on for days.

They'd probably also be mighty surprised that I dislike Jan & Dean. I'm sorry, but the singing was just horrible. (Well, actually, I'm not sorry at all.) Off-key and too nasally. I tried to force myself to like Save For A Rainy Day but not even that has a listenable moment for me.

More thoughts on the Beatles reissues

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 13:15:00 -0400

People who follow my blog are probably wondering what I mean by "more." I posted my first thoughts on my Facebook profile as a note. But if I post through my blog, it also gets crossposted to Facebook. Sorry about the confusion.

In summary, when I first listened to the mono With The Beatles and Rubber Soul, I was disappointed. The only difference I found between the 1987 and 2009 mono With The Beatles CDs was that the bass line is more prominent. The overall sound was still muddy. On the way home on September 8 (my mono box set arrived a day early!) I heard some of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band in mono; the sound quality was noticeably better, but still not great. But it was quite an experience, especially "A Day In The Life." Later that night, "Tomorrow Never Knows" on the mono Revolver literally left me speechless.

Having said that, I've been familiar with the mono stuff for quite some time. I own original pressings of the mono albums (both U.K. and U.S. versions, save Please Please Me -- I don't have $200 to spend on a gold-text Parlophone!) and have heard the Dr. Ebbetts "needle-drop" pirates, but the new release was a new experience for me. While I found the EQ to be lackluster (little to no treble -- way too much middle), the clarity is something to behold.

On 9/9/09, my wife and I bought the stereo Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band and Abbey Road CDs. I wasn't expecting Sgt. Pepper's to be a huge improvement over the 1987 CD, as the 1987 CD actually has decent sound to it. Hoo, boy...I of little faith! My wife cued up "Lovely Rita," a song I never cared for and in fact usually skip. My involuntary reaction to hearing the intro was to yell "HOLY F**K!" So much brighter and livelier!

Yesterday on the way home from work I listened to a little bit of Abbey Road on my iPod. (Don't worry -- I ripped it using Apple Lossless Codec to insure I wouldn't get the lossy compression of MP3s.) Now...I had only recently become acquainted with the 1983 Toshiba CD release of said album, which the Blue Meanies very quickly forced out of production. I had never heard Abbey Road sound so good! The 1987 CD sounded muddy. The cassette version (which flip-flopped "Come Together" and "Here Comes The Sun," btw), which I received as a Christmas present in 1987, was very drab. I have the original vinyl, and I don't care what anybody says, unless you have a very high-end, four-digit-price turntable, vinyl isn't the end-all be-all. Even the Mobile Fidelity Sound Lab half-speed master (the one MFSL album I ever bought, which I spent $60 on about five or six years ago at Beatlefest) version sounds to me like a vinyl version of the CD -- same sound quality but with none of the surface noise you'd expect on vinyl. The Dr. Ebbetts pirate CD didn't impress me, either. It just drove me up the wall that the Beatles' best album wasn't available in decent sound quality. But the Toshiba CD...wow! That was it for me!

Now...back to my way home from work. I had both the Toshiba and 2009 official versions on my iPod. I did an A/B comparison of the two. The Toshiba has slightly better EQ in that there's more high-end, but unfortunately this means there's a lot more hiss and sibilance. The EQ on the 2009 CD is good enough to listen to, but there's no hiss, and the overall sound is the clearest I've ever heard. So I made an executive decision: the 2009 version is the canonical version, as far as I'm concerned. I later removed the Toshiba version from my iPod and iTunes and will eventually purge it from my CDs.

Next I listened to the mono Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band all the way through. Again, not the greatest EQ, but comparatively better than most of the rest of the mono box. And to tell you the truth, it confirmed what I always believed about the mono version: despite what George Martin and The Beatles have said for decades, the mono version is NOT the best way to hear it.

Except for "She's Leaving Home," which plays back slow on the stereo version, the album sounds slowed down a tad. (I have perfect pitch; trust me on this!) But I was reminded of all the mistakes on the mono versions of various Beatles albums that were fixed on the stereo versions. The audience effects on Sgt. Pepper's come in pretty abruptly, while on the stereo version they fade in and out nicely. The transition from "Good Morning, Good Morning" to the reprise of the title track is atrocious on the mono mix but smooth on the stereo. There's a cough in the mono version of "Norwegian Wood" that was fixed in stereo. There are double-tracking vocal flubs in "Matchbox" and "Slow Down" that are either fixed or lessened in the stereo versions but very obvious in the mono versions. The intro of "I Call Your Name" is very sloppy on the mono version (and to be honest with you not so hot on the stereo version of the U.S. album Something New) but fixed on the standard stereo version. "Don't Pass Me By" plays back too fast on the mono version, and the violinist screws up at the end; on the stereo version the playback is at normal speed and the violin part is flawless throughout. Don't get me wrong -- listening for these anomalies actually makes the experience very enjoyable for me; I love it...but why does the Beatles' producer insist that the versions with the mistakes are definitive? (Of course, I know of a few very famous exceptions to the rule -- "Please Please Me," "I Should Have Known Better," and "If I Fell" have some well-loved mistakes in stereo that are not present in mono.)

Having said all that, I think the stereo version of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band is definitive. The Beatles went from clean-shaven, gray-suited moptops to mustachioed (thanks to Paul McCartney's wipe-out on a motorcycle), colorful musical innovators almost overnight. Seriously, the transition from 1966 Beatles to 1967 Beatles is like the transition of The Wizard of Oz from sepiatone to color. It only makes sense to admire The Beatles' new masterpiece in that newfangled stereo, especially with the panning effects used on "Good Morning, Good Morning" and "A Day In The Life." (The exception to my sentiments: "Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds," which has some marvelous flanging effects in mono but not in stereo; the flanging was done manually and live during the mono mixing; the folks at EMI didn't want to deal with that hassle when they went back and did the stereo mix! The stereo remix on Yellow Submarine Songtrack brings the flanging back, though, and is very faithful to the mono version.) And the sound on the new stereo CD just seals the deal.

Today on the way to work I listened to the mono Revolver. While the overall sound isn't as good as I'd expect (again, too much middle and hardly any high -- setting the iPod EQ to "Treble Booster" does help, though), the music itself is more enjoyable. The artificial double-tracking on the vocals is much more noticeable in mono than on the stereo version, on which the two vocal tracks are panned across the stereo. (Exception: "Got To Get You Into My Life;" the ADT is barely audible.) The bass line is much more discernible -- trust me, you haven't heard nothin' if you haven't heard the bass in mono yet! Many of the guitar solos also have ADT on them, missing from the stereo version.

After Revolver finished, I cued up the mono Magical Mystery Tour. Of the mono CDs I've heard (I haven't listened to Please Please Me, A Hard Day's Night, Beatles For Sale or Help! yet), this is so far the best-sounding, even better than Sgt. Pepper's. Nothing notable to report in terms of mixing besides the good EQ, except that "Flying" seems to have a much longer fade-out than I'm used to, and "Blue Jay Way" sounds incredible. That's as far as I've gotten so far.

Overall, with what I've heard and seen from the mono box and the two stereo CDs I've purchased, my thoughts are as follows:

- I've read two, maybe three, not-so-excited reviews of the reissues. One said that the only "improvement" is that the new CDs are louder than the old. From the A/B'ing I've done with both the actual CDs and my iPod, this doesn't seem to be the case at all. I have a good set of ears, and I detected very little (if any) difference in volume.

- For the most part, the enjoyment of the mono stuff depends on the playback equipment. On an iPod and in my car stereo, it didn't sound great, but setting the EQ to "Treble Booster" improves things. Interestingly, With The Beatles, which sounds dull and muddy on pretty much everything, sounds a lot better on the tinny speakers in my MacBook.

- Just the packaging alone and the attention to detail makes the $200+ a bargain for the mono box.

- While the EQ isn't great on the mono box, the clarity is incredible.

- The stereo CDs are where you'll hear the biggest improvement. In the Chicago Tribune I mentioned in my previous note, the agreement of the four listeners was that Abbey Road was the worst-sounding. Heh...if that's the worst-sounding, then I'm dying to hear what the BEST-sounding is! The improvement on Abbey Road was astonishing for me. And seriously, when you hear the new stereo Sgt. Pepper's CD for the first time, make sure you're not driving -- you probably will drive off the road and hit a tree. I almost did -- and this was on Lake Shore Drive, where there are NO TREES. Yes, it was THAT GOOD that I almost hit a tree on a treeless road!!

A Chicago Cubs Epiphany

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Sun, 2 Aug 2009 22:21:00 -0400

Something just occurred to me after reading today's installment of Classic Peanuts:

Charlie Brown is the Chicago Cubs. How do I figure? Well, think about this...

Charlie Brown just can't win. However, he does come pretty close sometimes. Remember the spelling bee? Just as he was about to win the big one...he failed miserably. But you can't say he didn't try his hardest. And no matter how miserably he fails, you can count on him to try again.

And no matter how miserably he fails, everybody loves Charlie Brown. At least, everybody with a heart does.

Hair -- the Broadway revival

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 17:06:00 -0400

Not everybody who knows me knows this, but I have an obsession with the musical Hair. It's not so much that I've kept it secret from people; I just never happened to mention it to some people. It all started probably around 1990. I knew a little bit about the show and had heard some songs from it as performed by music groups and singers from the era. Please be warned; this is going to be a long read.

I saw the movie in the summer of 1990 and really dug the music. It's not the best movie I'd ever seen, but I watched it over and over because of the music. I went to the public library and checked out the Broadway cast recording (they didn't have the movie soundtrack) and was floored by how many additional songs there were that I didn't hear in the movie. And I liked what I heard, too, although I found it to be just like any other cast recording, and some of the singing wasn't all that great...and I couldn't fathom that the high-pitched voice singing "Donna" was a man!

But over the next few years, I nurtured my obsession. I bought the cassette version of the Broadway cast recording, which had songs not on the original cast recording ("I Believe In Love," "Electric Blues" et al) and songs that WERE on the original cast recording but edited down to save space ("Hashish," "I Got Life," et al). I then found a copy of the original 1967 New York Shakespeare Festival Public Theater off-Broadway cast recording, and many other cast recordings -- Japan, France, London, and God knows what else.

There were also a couple of oddballs among the albums I found. One was DisinHAIRited, an album made by the Broadway cast in November 1969 that focused on songs that for some reason or other 1) were part of the show at one time but dropped by the time of the Broadway opening (such as "Dead End" and "Exanaplanetooch," both of which actually appeared on the off-Broadway album), 2) were in the show but for some reason didn't make the original release of the Broadway album ("Electric Blues" -- with additional lyrics not found in any other version I've heard -- and "The Bed," among others), or 3) were never in the show to begin with but were actually bits of dialog that the show's composer Galt MacDermot decided for the heck of it to set to music (including "Hello There," which eventually did become an official show song, and "I Dig"). This album wasn't a rush job like the Broadway cast recording was, so it actually sounds closer to a rock album and probably closer to how the music sounded in performances. The other oddball album I found was another one featuring the Broadway cast, Divine Hair/Mass In F. It was recorded in 1971 to celebrate Hair's third anniversary on Broadway, and was a mass at the Cathedral of St. John the Divine. The mass proper was a new mass composed by Galt MacDermot, and the hymns were actually songs from the show, performed by the cast and various choirs. Both of these albums are great listening that I hope make it to CD some day.

In 1996, I finally saw a production of Hair for the first time. The "tribe" was from California State University at Fullerton, and Michael Butler, the show's original Broadway producer, brought them to Chicago that year for a short run in the summer at the Athenaeum Theater on the north side. The reason: that was when the Democratic National Convention was going on in Chicago, and Butler had wanted Hair to be on stage in Chicago at the same time of the convention, as it was in 1968. It was the most amazing thing I'd seen on a stage. I loved the story, the characters, the actors, the band, the use of literally every part...EVERY PART...of the theater before, during, and after the show...and I had to go back and see it again. Wow...just amazing, and so helped turn the Hair obsession up to 11 on the obsession amplifier.

Flash forward to July 28, 2009. Lots of changes in my life. I had moved to New Jersey and eventually back to Chicago. I'd gotten married. September 11 happened. I'd changed jobs and careers and even gone through a nearly three-year bout of unemployment. I actually got to have lunch with Michael Butler on two occasions and met Hair's surviving author Jim Rado on two occasions and have befriended Walter Michael Harris from the original Broadway cast. (And I do want to say publicly that W. Michael is one of the nicest guys I've had the pleasure to meet.) In terms of Hair, by this time I had acquired at least 13 different cast recordings (including the movie soundtrack) and had seen a (rather lame) production of it at a community theater in northern New Jersey. And I'm sure I gained a ton of weight. But there was a brief run of Hair back at its birthplace, Joseph Papp's Public Theatre, and then it moved to Broadway. My wife and I take trips to New Jersey at least twice a year, so we figured we'd check out the new Hair when we were out in the summer.

Now...I can't really comment on the show as a whole without being prejudiced by the amazing production I saw in Chicago and the mess that was the production I saw in Morristown, New Jersey. Did I like the new Broadway version? I loved it. Do I want to see it again? Oh, yeah. (My wife, however, wants to see it at least ten more times!)

Before I get into my specifics, just a few general comments:

- I'm thankful...extremely thankful...that they did NOT use that awful second verse of "Aquarius" that some modern productions use. In fact, the only songs with extra lyrics were "Air" and "Black Boys."

- No "Hippie Life"...thank God!

- There were bows at the end...the usual kind: first, the "secondary" cast, then the main cast. I found that the bows kind of ruined the spirit of the show. C'mon -- when you do Hair, no bows!

- Bernard Purdie is an amazing drummer! I'm pretty sure many of his claims are exaggerated (such as being the drummer in the original production -- uhh, no...for its entire run, the drummer was Idris Muhammad...and sorry, Bernard, you did NOT overdub drums on Beatles songs that Ringo couldn't do -- you're thinking of Pete Best on the Tony Sheridan recordings!). But wow, could he wail on those things! The entire band did a great job. In both the 1996 Chicago production I saw and the new Broadway production, the band sounded just like that: a band. In the production I saw in New Jersey, however, it was obvious the band was playing only what was written on their sheet music, afraid to stray from anything or apply dynamics anywhere, and as a result, they sounded very restrained and, in points, very afraid.

- Maria Callas once said how as audiences change, operas must also change to fit the tastes of the audience. She specifically said that passages may have to be cut and operas might have to be shortened to be accessible to audiences, while still being faithful to the composer. I definitely saw this philosophy in action, as with this production of Hair, a lot was cut -- undoubtedly because Act I would have been 90 minutes long easily if they hadn't cut things! Claude's "soap opera" scene was cut. "The Bed" was omitted, which is fine though because it doesn't really add anything to the show. No "Dead End" either, but that was only added to the show after a few years on Broadway. Nothing terribly essential was taken out.

I guess what I can do is comment on the productions I have seen and make observations on what stuck out, and on the way make some comparisons. Be warned -- there are spoilers. In my comparisons, "CHI" will refer to the Cal State production I saw in Chicago. "NJ" is the...bad...production I saw in Jersey, and "BW" is the new Broadway version. This review will end very abruptly. You've been warned.

THE SET
CHI: Bare stage, with the band in scaffolding off to the left and dressed like the Tribe. No curtain (very true to the original Broadway production).
NJ: Bare stage, I think, with the band at the back of the stage, all dressed in black. No curtain.
BW: Oriental rug on the stage. A large tie-dyed sheet used as a curtain. The band is on the back of the stage to the right, some members on risers, others literally in the back of an old pickup truck that was colored in military decor. Band members were dressed in casual street clothes, at least one or two in '60s hippie gear.

THE BEGINNING
CHI: Start time on the ticket was 8:00pm. Nothing happened on stage at 8:00, but I did notice that various tribe members were walking around on seats in the theater, climbing on balconies, and mingling with the audience. At about 8:15, they all disappeared, and the action focused to the stage, where some folks in modern, shiny vinyl clothing started dancing to some modern electronic music, prompting some people to believe we were watching a modernized version of Hair. As the music continued, a video montage was projected, starting with Bill Clinton and very gradually going back in time, ending with LBJ announcing how he wouldn't seek re-election, with a very dramatic echo effect added to his voice. A young man in army fatigues walks out and is gunned down by snipers. The tribe emerges on stage, and a woman very, very slowly sings the first verse of "Aquarius." At the chorus, "Aquarius" carries on as we know it, while the soldier is revealed to be Claude, the show's protagonist. Various members of the tribe remove his fatigues and helmet, revealing his long hair. Berger introduces himself by saying hi to the audience, then reiterating, "HI!!", as if demanding the audience to say hi back. (It did.)
NJ: None of the tribe out in the crowd, not mingling, not walking on seats, nothing. The sound of someone talking, then another person talking, and more people talking, etc. The cast, dressed as modern-day businessmen, parents, etc. walk across the stage to these sounds. Berger, Claude's best friend, emerges from the back of the theater while all the action freezes, and he slowly walks down the aisle to observe what's happening. Berger doesn't interact with the audience.
BW: As with the NJ performance, none of the tribe were mingling with the crowd, at least as far as I could see. They MAY have been out in the lobby or on the sidewalk, but I don't know for sure. I did notice a couple of hippies running down the side aisle in the balcony, very subtly, but shortly after they got to the end of the balcony the lights dimmed and the curtain went up, never to be seen again. After "Aquarius," Berger introduces himself to the audience and does a LOT of interaction with the crowd, including scolding latecomers who were being ushered to their seats, choosing a random woman in the front row and introducing her as his mom (despite the fact that she was maybe five years his senior!), and pulling another guy up from the front row and asking for a hug.

"MANCHESTER, ENGLAND"
CHI: Claude danced The Freddy as he sang this.
BW: Claude didn't do The Freddy, but during the verse mentioning film directors, the band played a reggae rhythm.

"AIN'T GOT NO (reprise)"
BW: (aka "Ain't Got No Grass") The tribe had the crowd in the palm of their hands. The entire house was clapping along, possibly even on their feet. Very intense and loud!

"INITIALS"
BW: Interesting choreography -- for most of the song, the tribe act as if they're riding a crowded subway train, huddling very closely together with their hands in the air as if they were strap-hanging.

"I GOT LIFE"
CHI: During Claude's last verse of the main part of the song, the band played a rhythm similar to The Isley Brothers' "Shout." During the "And I'm gonna spread it 'round the world" verse, a girl in the tribe yells, "YEAH-YEAH!! YEAH-YEAH!! YEAH-YEAH!!," much like the beginning of "Shout Part 2."
BW: Nothing unique to mention, but this was definitely a huge show-stopper. Got a big ovation from the audience.
(Off-topic memory...in 2005 there was a "tribe" reunion in New York City. Anybody who had anything to do with a production of Hair was invited. Walter Michael Harris from the original Broadway cast led a singalong, and during "I Got Life" he pointed to body parts as a lyrical cue.)

"GOING DOWN"
CHI: Interestingly, in Chicago they cut out the song Berger sings celebrating his expulsion from "high school heaven." One of the cast members told me they cut it because the first act was too long as it was.
BW: Left intact. Unlike with most productions, Berger doesn't interrupt with a commercial advising you to call a number telling how to get your diploma at home.

MARGARET MEAD
CHI: After "Hair," the tourist lady and her husband strip down to their underwear -- their leather underwear (including a bra on the husband) -- and did kind of an S&M dance, with Margaret whipping her husband in rhythm to "My Conviction."
BW: The Margaret Mead scene is more traditional -- the tourist lady opens her coat to reveal that she's a man.

"EASY TO BE HARD"
CHI: The yellow shirt argument is short and to the point: Sheila gives Berger the shirt, he rips it and says he doesn't like yellow, and a short argument ensues that ends with Burger slapping Sheila in the face.
BW: Berger goes on for a seemingly long time about why he can't wear the yellow shirt, but more in a mocking tone than an angry one. He doesn't slap Sheila, but she's visibly hurt.

"BE-IN"
BW: As with most versions, the singing is interrupted while various adults (in this case, Claude's parents) interrupt and interject their conservative views. However, all of their comments were brand-new, at least to me. Don't remember them off the top of my head, but none of the comments from "classic" productions, such as "I'd like to see some of you daffodil crowd in front of a machine gun," "Ship these peaceniks to the Vietnam meat grinders," etc.

THE END OF ACT 1
CHI: During the last verse of "Where Do I Go," all tribe members still on stage (except Claude) slowly strip nude. We see police lights and hear sirens, and the tribe panic and pick up their clothes and run off the stage. A shirtless cop comes in and announces that everybody's under arrest for watching a lewd, obscene show. (VERY fake.) Then announces it's time for intermission.
NJ: The tribe start to strip at the end of "Where Do I Go" (some revealing things that nobody in the '60s would worn, like purple brassieres, etc.) but before any nudity happens the officer comes out to arrest the audience. Really kind of a lame cop-out way to do the end; either do the nude scene or DON'T do it!
BW: The tribe strips pretty quickly as "Where Do I Go" comes to an end. After the song ends, a rousing standing ovation from the crowd (really, it must be awkward to stand on stage nude while an audience gives you a standing ovation!), but suddenly we see red flashing lights and hear sirens and alarms. Now...people who have seen Hair before expect the phony cop to come in and "arrest" everybody, but...instead, an usher walks up in front of the stage and very cheerfully announces that the show will resume in 15 minutes. Very effective, I think! Got a good laugh out of it!

"WALKING IN SPACE"
CHI: Berger hands out joints and gives people nicknames: "One for Tricky Dick..." When he gets to Hud, he says, "One for James Brown." Hud responds by singing the first verse "I Got You (I Feel Good)," accompanied by the band playing a note-perfect re-creation of the song. During the intro, Hud sits at the front of the stage and reads a poem that begins "We are the hippies." Lyric changes: "ship us off to war" becomes "send us...", and the "Pottsville to starlight" lyrics from the movie are used.
BW: No nicknames when Berger hands out the joints. Original Broadway lyrics used. No poem from Hud. During the mention of colors, lights flash in the specified colors.

THE TRIP
CHI: Includes dialogue from Gone With The Wind, ending with Rhett Butler saying, "Frankly, my dear...I don't give a f**k!"
BW: Although Clark Gable is called during President Grant's roll call, there's no Gone With The Wind dialogue. The chain-murders of Buddhist monks and nuns isn't repeated.

"WHAT A PIECE OF WORK IS MAN"
CHI: The music is very, very quiet (only a keyboard accompanying), and the lyrics are sung very sullenly -- and solemly. The two members of the tribe -- one black and one white (as in most productions) -- hold each other while singing. Video footage of Vietnam fighting is projected.
BW: The music is similar to that of the original Broadway version, with military-style drums. The two tribe members (again, one black and one white) walk around and observe the destruction, and surprise of surprises, Claude actually sings along to part of it.

THE ENDING
CHI: During the final rally, Claude appears in fatigues, including a battle helmet, dressed as he's dressed in the beginning of the show. The tribe very quietly sing "Let The Sunshine In" as a tombstone with Claude's name appears, implying that he was killed in Vietnam. The mournful song becomes a celebration, as members of the tribe go out into the crowd and dance and sing with the audience. Outside of the theater are a few from the tribe handing out flowers to those exiting, thanking them for "celebrating" with the tribe.
BW: During the final rally, Claude appears wearing a military dress uniform (*gasps of shock coming from various parts of the audience*), with various decorations, implying perhaps that he turned the military into a career. The tribe gathers closely together and sings a pleading rendition of "Let The Sunshine In" as snow falls. The music stops, and "Let The Sunshine In" continues ad infinitum a capella, as the tribe descends the stage and continues to sing on the way out of the theater, revealing Claude lying down on a U.S. flag, being snowed on. The tribe reappears on stage as an instrumental reprise of "Hair" plays, and do standard traditional theatrical bows (much to my chagrin). A couple of guys from the tribe bring out a railing that they attach to the steps going up to the stage and then invite the audience to join them onstage for a reprise of "Let The Sunshine In."

Kick-Ass Beach Boys Song #1: "Surfin' U.S.A."

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Sun, 31 May 2009 12:28:00 -0400

So...I figured I'd do a series of posts called "Kick-Ass Beach Boys Song." And it's just what you think. No, the Beach Boys aren't my favorite group, but they're definitely up there, although I'm more of a Brian Wilson fan rather than of the band he created. The numbers are simply numbers, no ranking or anything.

I figured since June is just hours away here in the U.S., I'd start with a pretty rockin' little number that most people know.

I know what you're thinking. "Surfin' U.S.A." is very dated, with the nasally vocals, the "oooooooh" background vocals, the chiming Fender Jaguar that is sooooo 1963. The organ solo is kind of cheesy. In fact, most people would probably say, "Beach Boys? Kick ass? HA!" Mind you, these are the same people who've never heard, say, the concert version of "Marcella" or the single version of "Cotton Fields." I pity them.

If you fall into the category of those who find "Surfin' U.S.A." cheesy and dated, I strongly advise you to do this: listen to Chuck Berry's original "Sweet Little Sixteen." Listen to it again. And again and again and again. Listen to it over and over and over for an hour, or at least to the point that you can't get it out of your head, whichever comes first.

Now, listen to "Surfin' U.S.A.," the Beach Boys' re-make of the Chuck Berry song. If you can find the mono mix, I strongly recommend that over the stereo, as the mono mix is pure Brian Wilson production in all its glory, and somehow actually sounds like you're hitting the surf. The "inside, outside, U.S.A." background vocals will catch you off-guard...in a good way. The excitement is almost tangible.

And how can you not love these lyrics: "...we can't wait 'til June. We'll all be gone for the summer. We're on safari to stay. Tell the teacher we're surfin'." Wow. Really, think back to when you were in school and couldn't wait to get out. Tell me this sentiment doesn't still flow through your veins.

REPENT, SINNER!!!!

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Thu, 2 Apr 2009 16:00:00 -0400

So I've been noticing there's a controversy about Barack Obama being invited to speak at Notre Dame's graduation; it's tradition for the President of the United States to deliver an address at this event. And some of my fellow Catholics are getting up in arms because he...doesn't detest abortion and is all for stem cell research. And now, Cardinal George here in Chicago is getting pissy and moany about it.

Of course, it just calls to mind "Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." "Judge not lest ye be judged."

It also occurs to me that many people say that the founder of my religion was none other than Jesus Christ. These are the same people who want me to believe that it's okay -- nay, NECESSARY -- to hate people who are scientifically predetermined to be attracted to their own gender, to vote based on whether or not a candidate is in favor of one particular sin, and in other ways cast judgment to people who are in some ways sinful and unclean. These are the same people who forget that the founder of our religion -- the guy who allowed himself to be crucified so he could bring us eternal salvation -- was best friends with a prostitute and hand-picked a murderer to be one of his followers. Now, mind you I haven't personally had a conversation with Jesus about this yet, but I'm pretty sure that given the circumstances, the LEAST of his worries are about whether a guy finds another guy attractive or if using aborted fetuses for research on improving the quality of life (fetuses that otherwise would be thrown in the trash) is on someone's mind.

Now, going back to the gay thing...people often cite Leviticus as the source that says homosexuality is a sin, and they're correct: it really does say that in Leviticus. It also says, understandably, that boinking your daughter, aunt, son-in-law, mother, father, or a non-human animal is unclean. So they have something there. But let's see what other sins there are, courtesy of the book of Leviticus.

It is a sin for your hair to be messy and your clothes to display wear and tear.
"Do not let your hair become unkempt, and do not tear your clothes, or you will die and the LORD will be angry with the whole community." (10:6)
Come on, people -- we're all suffering because of your f*cking bed-head!!!

All patriotic Americans are sinners because the eagle is the symbol of the United States.
Check it out -- verses 13 through 18 of chapter 10 list the eagle among "the birds you are to detest." And this is a country whose flag's pledge of allegiance invokes God, and whose Declaration of Independence defines God-given rights?? Talk about a double-standard!

Boys are cleaner than girls.
Leviticus 12:1-5 clearly says that if a woman gives birth to a boy, she's unclean for seven days, but she's unclean for two weeks if she gives birth to a girl. And as someone who's been in several girls-versus-boys arguments in my pre-teen years, I say: NYAAAA!

Being circumcised as soon as possible after birth might be good for your health, but it's BAD FOR YOUR SOUL!!!
Leviticus 12:3 says that eight days after being born, the boy is to be circumcised. Heh...some of you STILL haven't had the snip! Come on, sinner, what are you waiting for?!!?

Mothers need to do certain things after they give birth -- but there are economic considerations.
Hey, Catholic moms (and all other Christian moms, for that matter), after your purification ritual after giving birth, did you bring a year-old lamb as a burnt offering to your priest and a pigeon or a dove as penance for your sins? Well, in these trying times you probably can't afford a lamb, so double up on the bird if that's the case. Certainly if you think gays are wrong because it says so in the Bible, you're willing to admit you have committed a grievous offense by not delivering the goods to your priest, n'est-ce pas? Look it up: Leviticus 12:6-8.

There's a right way and a wrong way to rid your clothes of mildew.
The wrong way: laundry products. The right way: Show it to your priest, who will then quarantine the affected article of clothing for a week, check to see if the mildew spread, and burn the article of clothing still affected by the mildew. It clearly says that in Leviticus 13:47-52, so it must be the only sin-free way of doing it, right?

Never mind this "I am third" crap -- look out for NUMBER ONE, dammit!
When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the alien." (Leviticus 19:9-10)
In other words, you get the good stuff; those who don't have the money to buy their own food get the crap that landed on the ground, as do people who are new to the area.

Hey, Mister Jeans-and-a-T-Shirt Guy, you're a sinner!
Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material. (Leviticus 19:19)
I guess this means I'm going to hell.

Shaving is a sin.
Do not cut the hair at the sides of your head or clip off the edges of your beard. (Leviticus 19:19 again.)
And you wonder why Mr. Burns is considered evil: "Mattingly, I told you to trim those sideburns!"

There are no such entities as illegal aliens.
Leviticus 19:33-34 says that foreigners are to be treated as if they were natives. Certainly devout Christians would agree that this means we reallly need to streamline immigration and naturalization, no?

If you have acne, you cannot receive communion.
Don't believe me? Check out Leviticus 22:4.

And finally, one thing we ARE getting right: Labor Day. Read on:
On the first day of the seventh month you are to have a day of rest, a sacred assembly commemorated with trumpet blasts. Do no regular work, but present an offering made to the LORD by fire. (Leviticus 23:23-25)
Well, okay, not quite...I admit I'm a sinner in that the last time I had a Labor Day cookout I didn't have any trumpet blasts. You'd better believe that I'm going to bring a couple of animals to my priest today so I can remedy this deplorable situation. But what's really cool is that the "seventh month" in our day means July, while back in the days of Leviticus it meant September. And in this country we have celebrations at the beginnings of both months!

So, Cardinal, have you kept all this in mind? How many people have you not blasted despite the fact that they have clearly committed all these sins?

Oh, and watch out the next time you sit down. Make sure that seat was never used by a menstruating woman, because - yep, you guessed it - that's a sin, too.

What is and what would never be...thank God!

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Sun, 22 Mar 2009 01:46:00 -0400

From first through sixth grades, I attended Maternity BVM, a grade school in Bourbonnais, Illinois, where I was living. Bourbonnais is a couple of miles north of Kankakee, the county seat of Kankakee County, the Armpit of Illinois; I knew I wanted to escape it someday. The school -- I never thought much of it because, well, it was a school, you go there because you have to, you go home, watch cartoons, do your homework, and that’s it. Sure, I had friends there. But I lost touch with them after sixth grade.

My father had been working in Joliet for a couple of years, and the 35-mile commute was taking a toll on him, so we moved to Joliet....aaaahhh, much better! An actual city! Civilization! Stuff to do! We could go to a mall without driving for half an hour -- nay, two malls! (There was no mall in the Kankakee area at the time; there is now.) And much to my mother’s delight, tuition at St. Pat’s was a lot cheaper than that of Maternity BVM.

Now, all these years, I’m thinking Joliet was a great move. It’s a good, growing town. It has an AmTrak stop. It’s fairly close to Chicago. And should I decide to get into legal trouble, I’d have four prisons where I could be incarcerated close to home. St. Pat’s, I thought, was a great school, and for the first time in my life I felt the teachers cared about my well-being. Joliet Catholic was a great high school. When it merged with St. Francis Academy, though, we lost a lot of our traditions, and my last two years of high school were filled with anger over it, although I’ve met some of my best friends as a result of that merge. In retrospect, going to college in Joliet at St. Francis sucked, but I didn’t realize at the time; however, my personal life outside of college was enjoyable.

So here I am now, married and in my 30s; no kids yet but a dog, and I’m really enjoying life on the north side of Chicago. I always wanted to live here. Ever since I was a li’l tyke I wanted to live in the exciting city, so my wife and I moved here after my eight-year life in New Jersey. I have a nice job that has a decent but not great salary. (If I didn’t have so much credit card debt, I would say the job has a great salary.) I’m always taking classes at the Old Town School of Folk Music, which is perhaps my favorite place in the city next to my apartment.

Suddenly it happened...it’s about 6:45 in the morning, I want more sleep, and my wife is showing me a TiVoed scene from a Second City musical based on ousted governor Rod Blagojevich. The musical is called Rod Blagojevich: Superstar, and the scene features a song called “Jogging.” The cast members introduce themselves, and three words suddenly wake me up:

“I’m Michael Bradecich.” (rhymes with “radish”)

WHA?!

Oh, yes...Michael Bradecich...one of my circle of friends from Maternity BVM! I had forgotten that he had become an improv actor...well, an actor period. Wow...temporary jealousy takes over! I remember Yahoo!ing him before (I prefer Yahoo! over Google -- nothing against Google, I just prefer Yahoo!) and seeing these details about Mike: He’s an actor. He was - possibly still is - a member of IO Chicago (formerly ImprovOlympic). He was even in an episode of E.R., for Christ’s sakes! And apparently he still hangs out with some of the ol’ Maternity gang: Chris Witt, one of the smartest people in our class with a unique sense of humor, who now has a really cool studio production career going, if I’m not mistaken. Greg Schaertl, a year ahead of us, whom I remember as kind of an outcast (hey, we were little kids at the time - but to be honest, I didn’t mind him), but who’s in a band now. I saw a mention of David Kasper, who I remember to be a really nice guy, but I don’t remember what he’s up to these days. (You might notice I didn’t mention any girls. Well, to be honest with you, my maturity took so long that I thought girls were icky until the summer before eighth grade.) And even though he wasn't in our circle of friends, Pat Sandusky, who was a year behind us, is now part of Chicago's Olympics planning team, and he even ends up on TV from time to time. If only I’d not lost touch with these guys.

Recently I attended a St. Pat’s class reunion. Our classmate Jason Harms and teacher/basketball coach Pat Paul sadly couldn’t be with us because they left this world much too young. But I was surprised at how many of my Class of 1988 classmates got to attend -- and thrilled to see every one of them. How we reminisced of old times -- Jeff Belom (who was among the shortest in the class -- now he’s easily at least six feet tall!) being locked in the coat closet until he finished his tuna sandwich because Mr. Paul (God rest his tragically young soul) couldn’t stand the smell of tuna; Jim O’Brien being the first person in St. Pat’s basketball history to not only attempt but also sink a three-pointer at a basketball game against St. Ray’s; Lisa Mariotto, who sadly was unable to make it, sent a lot of her old St. Pat’s stuff with some great reminiscences, including her notebook from Mr. Paul’s World War II lectures and Mr. Paul’s predictions about how we’d all end up in the future; Mrs. Harms, the sixth-grade teacher and who was our math and science teacher, showed up for what was supposed to be a quick drop-by to say hi and she ended up staying for pretty much the whole time, and it was great to see her again; damn, it was great to see everybody. I felt this amazing bond with everybody as we remembered the days when we had to look at each other every day for nine months out of the year. And after 21 years, it really feels that we all care about each other. I know I care about these people, at least, and I’m glad to see that every single person who showed up either had a good job or was (voluntarily, I hope) a stay-at-home mom. All of us alums have families of our own, or at least was or is currently married.

Most of my classmates from St. Pat’s are still in the Joliet area; there are a few who lived out of state (indeed, Sarah Kane flew all the way out from Colorado just to spend a few hours with everybody), but most of us are still around. In fact, except for the out-of-staters, I live the farthest from Joliet, at about 35 miles. They have families -- and at least in one case a child who currently attends St. Pat’s. And there’s a special bond that nobody outside of our class could possibly understand. I never had any of that at Maternity.

I wouldn’t have it any other way. I’ve said before how remarkable it is that I spent six years at Maternity BVM, only two at St. Pat’s -- yet I have far more memories about my two at St. Pat’s than I do about my six at Maternity. While I do regret losing touch with my Bourbonnais friends and do hope that someday I’ll reconnect, I just can’t imagine that I’d ever want to change that 6-to-2 ratio of memories. I’d much rather have what I ended up with over what I jokingly theorize I could have ended up with.

2009

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Sun, 4 Jan 2009 21:23:00 -0500

Wow. Before now, my last post was two and a half months ago.

Sorry.

30 Rock Season 2 DVD set - a helpful hint!

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 14:14:00 -0400

So, what's on my mind grapes today?

Before I get to the gist of this entry, I just want to say that I don't understand why 30 Rock gets such low ratings. There's a huge online fan base. I run into 30 Rock fans everywhere. All the TV critics rave about the show. The show really cleaned up at the Emmys this year. I just don't get it...I dunno, maybe it just happens that the only people who don't watch the show are the ones who have the Nielsen boxes.

Anyway, the Season 2 DVD set just came out. It's a really well-done set. Yes, it only has about two-thirds of a season due to the writer's strike, but the extras (including "Werewolf Bar Mitzvah" in its entirety) and Easter eggs more than make up for the gap. The video quality is stunning. And the episodes are nothing short of priceless, especially "Rosemary's Baby" and "Cooter," the latter of which I excitedly told my wife, who's also a big fan but didn't get to see the episode when it aired as she was taking a class at the time, "IT WAS THE GREATEST HALF-HOUR OF TELEVISION OF MY LIFE!!"

Having said all of that, I was dismayed when my wife brought home the new box set, and disc 1 completely stalled 16 seconds into chapter 3, during the Spanish disclaimer. Couldn't stop. Couldn't get to a menu. Couldn't do anything but eject the disc. Hmmm... Tried disc 2. Same exact thing, right down to the second! uh huh. Probably some new-fangled encoding or encryption that's not compatible with the DVD player we bought as a wedding present to ourselves in 1999.

So my wife popped one of the discs in her laptop, and all worked fine, but man, I didn't want to watch a DVD on a computer -- that's why we have a DVD player and a TV, dammit! I tried ripping the episodes from the DVD and re-burning them (sans intro, promos, trailers, disclaimers, etc.), but alas I couldn't get a good burn and I was short on blank DVDs. I even tried some of those weird "unlock" codes you can get from a Yahoo! search, but none of them helped.

Just as a wild hunch, I tried this process:

1) Put the disc in the DVD player.
2) When the Universal logo and music plays, press "Stop." At this point, my DVD player warned me that resuming play at that point would be impossible; yeah, yeah, whatever.
3) I pressed a button on my remote that I never touched before in my life: "Title."

BINGO!!! Got the episode menu, and my wife and I have been enjoying season 2 of 30 Rock no longer from our TiVo box, but now from DVD, ever since.

If you have a similar problem with your copy, try those three steps.

And let me just end by saying that I love you. But not in a queer way.

Couldn't have said it better myself (or else I WOULD have!)

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 18:37:00 -0400

...or else, I WOULD have! heh...this is the only thing (I hope) I will EVER say about politics; I generally can't stand ANYBODY involved in politics, as I usually feel they're all crooks, and democrats and republicans and whigs and federalists and Green Party-ers are all equally evil and need to be destroyed, but...

-------------
I'm a little confused. Let me see if I have this straight:

*If you grow up in Hawaii, raised by your grandparents, you're "exotic, different."
*Grow up in Alaska eating mooseburgers, a quintessential American story.

*If your name is Barack, you're a radical, unpatriotic Muslim.
*Name your kids Willow, Trig and Track, you're a maverick.

*Graduate from Harvard law School and you are unstable.
*Attend 5 different small colleges before graduating, you're well-grounded.

*If you spend 3 years as a brilliant community organizer, become the first black President of the Harvard Law Review, create a voter registration drive that registers 150,000 new voters, spend 12 years as a Constitutional Law professor, spend 8 years as a State Senator representing a district with over 750,000 people, become chairman of the state Senate's Health and Human Services committee, spend 4 years in the United States Senate representing a state of 13 million people while sponsoring 131 bills and serving on the Foreign Affairs, Environment and Public Works and Veteran's Affairs committees, you don't have any real leadership experience.
*If your total resume is: local weather girl, 4 years on the city council and 6 years as the mayor of a town with less than 7,000 people, and 20 months as the governor of a state with only 650,000 people, then you're qualified to become the country's second-highest ranking executive.

*If you have been married to the same woman for 19 years while raising 2 beautiful daughters, all within Protestant churches, you're not a real Christian.
*If you cheated on your first wife with a rich heiress, and left your disfigured wife and married the heiress the next month, you're a Christian.

*If you teach responsible, age appropriate sex education, including the proper use of birth control, you are eroding the fiber of society.
*If, while governor, you staunchly advocate abstinence only, with no other option in sex education in your state's school system while your unwed teen daughter ends up pregnant, you're very responsible.

*If your wife is a Harvard graduate lawyer who gave up a position in a prestigious law firm to work for the betterment of her inner city community, then gave that up to raise a family, your family's values don't represent America's.
*If your husband is nicknamed "First Dude" with at least one DWI conviction and no college education, who didn't register to vote until age 25 and once was a member of a group that advocated the secession of Alaska from the USA, your family is extremely admirable.

OK, much clearer now.
--------------------------
[author unknown]

How NOT to respond to a want ad!

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:45:00 -0400

My company right now is going through a hiring phase, and we're booking up an entire week for interviews. It pities me to look at résumés and listen to people on the phone and having to put them in the "NO" pile for ridiculous reasons. Does any of this look like you? If so, you seriously need to rethink your strategy.

Put your name on your résumé.
Sadly, I have to say this for a reason.

Check your cover letter and résumé for spelling and grammar errors.
The same person whose résumé didn't have his name also loaded his cover letter with past-tense verbs that didn't end in "ed:" "I am very interest in the position..." "As request, I have enclose..." I once saw a résumé from an assistant editor candidate who not only wanted a $60,000 salary (assistant editors make about $23,000...heck, I have the power to fire people and I don't even make nearly that much!), but also listed a "Salad History" on her résumé. I'm pretty sure she meant "Salary History."

When replying to a Craig's List want ad, read the whole thing, right up to the point where the next ad begins!
The positions we have open are part-time. It clearly says that in the Craig's List ad. It says that in Craig's List's automatically-added stuff -- "This is a PART-TIME job," "No phone calls about this job," etc. Yet when we call applicants, it's clear they didn't read that part, and are shocked that they're not applying for full-time work.

Provide an active phone number.
If I had a dollar for every time I called a number on an applicant's number and got an automated "disconnected" message or a message saying that the customer is not accepting calls at the time, I'd be rich. These folks automatically go in the "no" pile. If you can't answer the phone, at least let people leave a message for you!

Do not use "LOL" in your cover letter.
Yes, there is a reason I have to say this. And yes, that applicant's paperwork went to the great filing cabinet in the sky. Don't get me wrong, I work for one of the most laid-back companies in the planet (indeed, when I was interviewed for my job, my boss interviewed me while wearing a t-shirt, denim shorts and sandals), but even we're professional enough to find colloquial computerese inappropriate for business communication!

Unless specifically requested, do not provide a URL for your blog or personal web site.
I don't care how strongly you feel your site or blog is good, useful, or creative, your potential employer will wholeheartedly disagree with you. If you don't believe me, I'll be happy to provide links proving my theory true. And for God's sake, if you must provide such a site or blog, make absolutely sure, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that it doesn't make you come across as a terrorist, racist, or pedophile.

Having a car is not a skill.
And no, you can't even use the argument that with today's economy and gas prices, you have to be pretty skilled to be able to own a car, pay for it, insure it, fuel it, etc., because the résumé in question is from 2005.

Mentioning proficiency in myspace.com is a sure-fire way to not even get an interview.
In otherwords...most companies aren't willing to hire 12-year-olds.

Jesus may save, but he won't get you a job.
Unless you're specifically applying for a position with a company that's very religiously focused, talking about Jesus too much during your interview, audition, etc. will make you come across as scary, and you probably won't get the job. Yes, it's okay to be religious, but a job interview is not the time to preach. (Indeed, we've hired many people who are very active in the church and are devoutly Christian, and we've also hired many atheists. Save your preaching for social times!)

I fear that I may have to add a lot more to this list. Nay...I dread that I'll have to add more before long.

You're FIRED!...uhh...I think...

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Mon, 23 Jun 2008 11:51:00 -0400

Did you ever have to fire someone, only to fail?

I have.

I don't know why I thought of this now, but a few years ago I actually tried to fire someone. Unsuccessfully.

Where I was working at the time, I was in charge of staffing test proctors for practice tests. We had one that was constantly screwing up. I think the last straw was a time when she had to be in Glen Ridge, New Jersey, by 8:45 in the morning. She called me at 9:15 that morning to let me know there weren't any answer sheets and wanted to know what to do. Thing is...I would always make sure the proctors had their materials well in advance so that they could check and make sure that we included everything, and if they didn't, we'd still have ample time to make enough arrangements. This proctor obviously didn't do that. Also, I found out she was late getting to the site. Why was she late? Because she got lost when she left her home in Jersey City and headed east on I-80 instead of west.

Now...mind you that I'm not a native of New Jersey, but I do know this much...if you head east out of Jersey City, you'll end up over, under, or in the Hudson River and heading into Lower Manhattan. Think about that.

So I sent her an e-mail telling her she's been making too many careless mistakes and that I would not be allowing her to do any more tests. I even pointed out how everybody knows that if you go ANYWHERE in New Jersey from Jersey City, you can only go west!

Then she sent me an e-mail begging me to let her proctor another test. The test she was referring to was one where we were expecting so many students that we needed multiple proctors. I thought about it, and realized that if I give the materials to one of the other proctors, then even if the incompetent proctor were late, the materials would already be there, and the other proctors can at least get the students started with the test. My boss told me that in this situation, we can go ahead and give her another chance.

Rats. The one time I tried to fire somebody, and it failed.

Oh well. I know I'll get the opportunity again. There will always be incompetence in the world.

What's the deal with Hyde Park?

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 12:29:00 -0400

It's weird. It seems that every major city has a Hyde Park neighborhood near it or in it.

Chicago has a Hyde Park on the South Side.

Los Angeles has a Hyde Park.

London, of course, has a Hyde Park.

There's a Hyde Park outside of New York City, I believe on Long Island.

Cleveland, Ohio has a Hyde Park.

For God's sake, there's even a Hyde Park in Cincinnati.

Just an observation. I guess there's a law that if you found a big city, you have to name one of the neighborhoods Hyde Park, or at least make a pact with a neighboring city that that city be named Hyde Park.

No, I did NOT visit your site, and I do NOT want to start a business.

noreply@blogger.com (dauber) — Fri, 6 Jun 2008 21:52:00 -0400

I can't believe it. Spam is getting so personalized now that I got one that actually addressed me by name, said that she enjoyed my blog and mentioned it by name and added that the title of it kind of reflects her life right now, and that I visited her web site a week or so ago.

1) Part of me wonders if it's just a coincidence and a machine is still just name-dropping by way of mail merge, SQL, or any other automated technique.

2) If my theory is incorrect and living people are really reading this, let this be known to all who read my blog: I DID NOT VISIT YOUR PISS-ANT LITTLE WEB SITE AND ASK FOR MORE INFORMATION, unless you're the Chicago Transit Authority explaining why the subway turnstile wouldn't let me through but when I scanned my transit card a second time suddenly I was given four transfers. If you e-mail me claiming that you read my blog and tell me that I visited your stupid web site and asked for more information on starting a stupid business, your e-mail will go straight to Knujon, who will work to shut your stupid server down.

Whaddya think of that?

Or since the e-mail was untruthful, could this count as mail fraud? And I could have you prosecuted, just like I'm going to do to Doc Watters of Denver, who somehow got my snail mail address and mailed me a pyramid scheme?

Oh, the things I would love to do, but it's illegal and probably against every religion, so I can't. Oh well.