HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: chp@unb.ca (Calvin Pert)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: KLAATU
Date: 27 Jul 92 12:56:09 GMT
Organization: U.N.B.

In article <1683010CF9.UCPL040@UNLVM.UNL.EDU> UCPL040@UNLVM.UNL.EDU writes:
>Path: csd.unb.ca!torn!utcsri!rutgers!usc!wupost!unlinfo.unl.edu!UNLVM.UNL.EDU!UCPL040
>From: UCPL040@UNLVM.UNL.EDU
>Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
>Subject: KLAATU
>Message-ID: <1683010CF9.UCPL040@UNLVM.UNL.EDU>
>Date: 27 Jul 92 01:07:37 GMT
>Sender: news@unlinfo.unl.edu
>Organization: University of Nebraska
>Lines: 14
>Nntp-Posting-Host: unlvm.unl.edu

>KLAATU was a four piece band from Canada that produced four albums
>on the Capitol label back in the late 1970s (one in 1980).  There
>was a rumor that this band was the reformation of the Beatles.
>Personally, I don't beleive this, even though there are a couple
>of KLAATU's songs that have some close similarities.  Apparently
>the band broke up in 1980 and has never produced anything else,
>either together or individualy.

>If anyone out there has any information on the band, needs any
>information on them, or enjoys their music as much as I do
>(there are very few of us left), post here or, better yet, E-mail me.
>            skott underwood    UCPL040@UNLVM

>                                   >skweek!<
Yeah!
Anus of Uranus... great tune!
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: jcsmith@eos.ncsu.edu (Jay C. Smith)
Subject: Re: Analog Beatles
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 18:59:24 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.214338.4805@menudo.uh.edu> edc@evolution.bchs.uh.edu 
(edward s. chen) writes:
>The interviewer asked George "What do you think of the Sgt. Pepper CD?  Have
>you listened to it?"  To which he gave the above response.   It is entirely
>possible he said something similar, somewhere else, but I don't believe so...

What interviewer?  You lead me to assume that you must have an encyclopedic 
collection of circa 1987 George Harrison interviews....

I just find it hard to believe that someone can correct my (mis)remembrance 
of a quote with a "definitive" quote from a particular interview, when I'm
not even sure what interview *I'm* referring to.

Anyone want to tell me what I had for breakfast on April 25, 1990?  :-)

Geez, are you gonna make me dig out that interview tape and listen to the
whole thing?  I can't find the Pulse or Rolling Stone right now, the
Musician interview doesn't seem to mention the CDs, and the Guitar Player
one doesn't mention Sgt. Pepper specifically (though it is a different
quote on CDs from the one cited).

--
Jay C. Smith
Domain/internet: jcsmith@eos.ncsu.edu  uucp: ...!mcnc!ncsuvx!eos!jcsmith
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Good.  For a minute I thought we were in trouble."
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: edc@evolution.bchs.uh.edu (edward s. chen)
Subject: Re: Analog Beatles
Organization: Little to none, or maybe not......
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 21:43:38 GMT

In article <7122646269315@c00005-118dan.eos.ncsu.edu> jcsmith@eos.ncsu.edu (Jay C. Smith) writes:
>In article <1992Jul24.193320.14902@rice.edu> edc@dawn.cs.rice.edu 
>(Edward Chen) writes:

>>George's exact comments were: "I don't know about the CD releases.  They
>>bring out everything.  Even some of the things we buried (in the mix) stick
>>out like a sore thumb."  George was commenting on the format, but never did
>>he claim Pepper was "remixed" for CD.
>
>I don't think the quoted comments constitute everything George has said about
>the Sgt. Pepper CD.  That he does not mention Sgt. Pepper or the exact item 
>sticking out in the mix leads me to believe that I was referring to a 
>different source than the one you are referring to.  Unfortunately, I do not 
>have mine handy.  I think it may have been the live call-in radio show he 
>did.  Plus there were interviews in Musician, Guitar Player, Pulse, and 
>Rolling Stone (I think).
>

The interviewer asked George "What do you think of the Sgt. Pepper CD?  Have
you listened to it?"  To which he gave the above response.   It is entirely
possible he said something similar, somewhere else, but I don't believe so...

<ESC>
-- 
..You either kiss the future or the past goodbye...
                          -- Ringo Starr (written by O'Deherty / Velez)

                                
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: dap@portal.vpharm.com (David A. Pearlman)
Subject: The worst Beatles compilations? (was: Re: The Old Mixmaster)
Organization: Vertex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 15:38:52 GMT

In article <1992Jul27.212147.17058@mic.ucla.edu> dmaclaug@agsm.ucla.edu (saki) 
writes:
>
>BTW, before anyone asks, "Rock and Roll Music" is *not* available
>on CD; it was a collection of earlier Beatles work repackaged
>rather crassly. You're all lucky it's out of print. :-)
>

OK...This brings up an interesting question: What was the worst Beatle-related
compilation/rehash?

Rock and Roll Music was definitely up there. But Love Songs and Beatles on
Film (for example) also have plenty to recommend them for this dubious
honor...

(It should also be noted that "Rock and Roll Music" was originally issued
as a double album; it was later reissued as two budget-line single albums;
as Saki notes, none of it is (as yet) available on CD. No loss...)

dap
-- 
=============================================================================
    David A. Pearlman

Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc.                     email: dap@vpharm.com
From: bohy6489@iscsvax.uni.edu
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Saki's .sig - I'd be amazed if *I* were the one to figure it out...
Date: 27 Jul 92 14:39:33 GMT
Organization: University of Northern Iowa

In article <1992Jul27.043442.10404@en.ecn.purdue.edu>, prokopy@en.ecn.purdue.edu (Dave) writes:
>>>"Modern music is, however, the groups' delight, and as if to prove the
>>>point, John and Paul have written over 50 tunes, ballads & faster
>>>numbers, during the last three years!"_________________________________
>>>                                        saki (dmaclaug@agsm.ucla.edu)
>>
>> And my last riddle - WHAT THE HEY DOES SAKI's .SIG MEAN?!
> 
> Good point!  Saki, would you PLEASE credit these things?!? :)  I've
> recognized a couple (like the "walls of Rome" one, which was pretty
> tricky), but I'd LOVE to know where you're getting these things!
> 
> -- 
> David Prokopy - prokopy@en.ecn.purdue.edu
> "So walk tall ... or baby, don't walk at all."
>  -Bruce Springsteen, "New York City Serenade" (1973)

This seems familiar.  Is it (or is it not) from the liner notes of one of their
(the fab's) early albums?  I know I have read this somewhere before.  I think
from Please Please Me.  British release.

===============================================================================
Jim Bohy                                        | "I am he as you are he as you
Graduate Student - Computer Science Education   |  are me as we are all
University of Northern Iowa                     |  together..." - J. Lennon
Cedar Falls, IA  50614                          |
bohy@att1.uni.edu                               |  by the above, I am myself
===============================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: s1082919@giaec.cc.monash.edu.au (T Hankinson is YODA)
Subject: Re: Maxwell's Silver Hammer
Organization: Monash University College Gippsland, Churchill, 3842, Australia
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 02:26:16 GMT

In article <1992Jul24.092038.21950@mr.med.ge.com> hinz@bonfire (David Hinz Mfg 4-6987) writes:
>c8906822@wombat.newcastle.edu.au writes:
>: There's a bit in "Maxwell's Silver Hammer", where McCartney laughs while
>: singing the lines : "....so he waits behind
>: 		     writing (laughs) 50 times....."
>:
>: everytime, and I mean EVERYTIME, I hear that I think what IS McCartney
>: laughing at!!! So if anyone out there has read/heard/or has an opinion tell me!
>: This might seem like a stupid question, but I thought "what the hell, can't
>: hurt?
>:
>I've always thought that John was doing something silly to try to shake Paul,
>acting it out or something.  Same with Rocky Racoon, where he 'proceeded to
>lie on the table', and Paul is barely under control.  I think it adds to
>the songs, however, it shows that they were having a good time.
>

     Well in one of my Beatles books, it says that John disliked Maxwell
     Silver Hammer so your probably right about John trying to shake Paul.
     I was born the 20.4.74 so how do I rate on the youngest RMBer



 Ringo : You will explain this to me when the opportunity presents itself.
       ( From the movie 'HELP !' )
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: brennan@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan)
Subject: Re: Analog Beatles
Reply-To: brennan@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:53:57 GMT

In article <1992Jul21.225058.9467@HQ.Ileaf.COM> pstodd@HQ.Ileaf.COM
(Paul Stoddard x5559) writes:

> [George Martin] did actually personally reply to my letter.

This is great!  

>   . . . Although my advice has been
>   sought from time to time about The Beatles' recording and I have
>   re-mixed some of the Beatles' recordings at EMI's request, the
>   ultimate decisions are made by EMI who have absolute control over
>   what is released and in what form."

I think he is being too modest here, which seems characteristic of GM.
While it is true strictly speaking that GM has no power over the
recordings, the fact seems to be that his advice is taken very very
seriously at EMI.  He has the authority of being the original producer
and being someone that the Beatles still trust.  I would be surprised
to see EMI go against GM's advice, let's put it that way.

>Rupert Perry, whose title is managing director. . . [said ] the first 4
>Beatles' CDs were "mock stereo" (his term).

I have read GM interviews where GM uses exactly this term for the
twin-track recording used for the first two albums.  I think Perry is
actually quoting GM here, perhaps second-hand.  What GM meant in this
case is not "electronically reprocessed" mono, but rather that the 
twin-track masters yield pretty awful "stereo" not worthy of the name,
or not what one expects as stereo in the normal sense of an image mixed
across the space between speakers.

> . . .  In fact, many of the tracks on "A Hard Day's Night"
>and "Beatles For Sale" had a clearly defined 3-way stereo image, indicating
>that more than 2 tracks were used to record them.

There's no question about this.  See Lewisohn "Beatles Recording Sessions".
They used 4-track for both albums.

>It was useless to persue the matter with Mr. Perry. He insisted on shifting
>the responsibility back to George Martin, claiming that the sessions for
>the first 4 albums were only done in mono.

GM has repeatedly stated that the first four were released only in
mono and mixed by him only in mono.  Mr Perry again is relying on GM
as a source for his own information.  It is amazing that an EMI
official can be so ignorant of the facts.  

>that when he was producing the FIRST Beatles' album, "there was no mixing,
>just direct STEREO" (emphasis mine).

Nonsense.  Minimal mixing to be sure-- after all, what can you do to
mix twin-track to 2 stereo tracks??-- but there is clearly some echo
of each track in the other one.  And studio records show GM supervised
the "stereo" mix sessions.

>Comments?

I congratulate you on actually writing to these people!  

--Joe Brennan

Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: edc@evolution.bchs.uh.edu (edward s. chen)
Subject: Re: The worst Beatles compilations? (was: Re: The Old Mixmaster)
Organization: Little to none, or maybe not......
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 01:37:26 GMT

In article <1992Jul29.203122.22553@midway.uchicago.edu> enf1@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <1992Jul28.180402.11845@menudo.uh.edu>, edward s. chen knocks the
>LP releases of Past Masters, saying that they were pointless and redundant.
>
>Redundant they may be, but the opportunity to complete one's vinyl Beatles
>collection in one fell swoop is no less valid than completing one's CD
>collection in the same manner.  As a certified vinyl addict but one without
>the cash to go seeking out lots of singles and compilation albums purely
>for the sake of a few songs, I found the Past Masters double album a
>vaulable addition to my collection.  I will grant you that the cover should
>have been something more stylish and that there are better things (like
>unreleased recordings) that could have been compiled, but the LP release
>serves the same purpose as the CD one, and I think does its job just as well.
>

Ummmm, that was the point of the British "Rarities" LP.  (Not the 
American one, but the one with the Blue cover)

The Track listing:
------------------
Across the Universe - stereo Past Masters version
Yes It Is - mono
This Boy - mono
The Inner Light - mono
I'll Get You - stereo
Thank You Girl - mono
Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand - stereo
You Know My Name (Look Up the Number) - stereo
Sie Liebt Dich - stereo
Rain - mono
She's a Woman - stereo
Matchbox - mono
I Call Your Name - mono
Bad Boy - stereo
Slow Down - mono
I'm Down - stereo
Long Tall Sally - stereo

Therefore, the thirteen original LP's, + the British "Rarities" (still in 
print) + the British "A Collection of Beatles' Oldies (But Goldies)" (not sure
whether this is still in print, but regardless, it is not a rarity) + the 
"Hey Jude" LP cover everything the "Past Masters" vinyl set does.  Had EMI 
chosen to release those three discs on CD rather then the two "Past Masters" 
discs, I would've been just as happy...

<ESC>



-- 
..You either kiss the future or the past goodbye...
                          -- Ringo Starr (written by O'Deherty / Velez)
From: bad@pismo.sw.stratus.com (Bruce Dumes)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: The worst Beatles compilations? (was: Re: The Old Mixmaster)
Date: 30 Jul 92 15:31:01 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering

In article <1992Jul29.175337.16207@news.columbia.edu> brennan@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan) writes:
>
>These were a single 2-LP set, or at least that's what I own, and
>"completely unnecessary on vinyl" isn't quite true.  

The American version was a 2-LP set; the UK version was two albums.

>Shall we raise the issue of the "Yellow Submarine" album?  Why did we
>need to buy a whole LP for 4 new songs?  And now it's a high-priced CD!
>

I've wondered whether the Beatles had anything to do with this release
or whether it was marketing.  Many sources lead one to believe that the
Beatles, especially Paul, wanted to make sure that people got their
money's worth when they bought a Beatle record.  Surely the Yellow Submarine
album is not representative of this.

Bruce


-- 
Bruce Dumes			| "Bruce is too obsessed with the Beatles"   |
Stratus Computer, Inc.		|   --comment on report card from Spring '64 |
bad@sw.stratus.com              
508-460-2816                    
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: ben@media.mit.edu (Benjamin Kline Lowengard)
Subject: Re: Multi-track recording
Organization: MIT Media Laboratory
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 17:17:11 GMT

In article <UePLfdS00awA0AGVIv@andrew.cmu.edu> bl2m+@andrew.cmu.edu (Benjamin D. Lukoff) writes:

>Second, when I said multi-track never could be true stereo, you
>misunderstood me. My point was an eight-track tape mixed to a two-track
>is what we call stereo, because the eight mono signals are mixed in
>auditory space. I certainly call that stereo. Just as well, any
>two-track recording, if the channels are panned left and right, is
>stereo, albeit very poor stereo which can be annoying. This has been
>checked out with the recording engineers here at CMU, in case you think
>this is just a high school kid speaking of things which he doesn't
>know...(see my posting "Patrick Dubbrow") Of course I consider
>multi-track true stereo. What do you all think I am, crazy or something
>:)
>
>Benjamin Lukoff

Well, Ben to Ben,
I'd object to saying that any Track recording no matter howmany tracks
one records is stereo. Stereo is a process of mixing, just like mono,
and quad. One can mix many tracks into these formats, two mono tracks
mixed into a single mono does not mean that the source was stereo.
It's better too think of tracks as layers and stereo as a "presence
representation". The amazing audio perspective stereo represents opposed
to mono is a result of placement, whether obtained through natural-binaural
miking, mixing, or separate layering. Phase and placement is an editing
judgement in multitrack mixdown. I have often spent hours mixing several
tracks down in stereo AND mono and it's hard to make similar tracks due to
these judgements. Note that early stereo pop recordings were mixed so
mono users could buy the albums as well..(look at the "Can be played on
Mono equipment" on some of the covers-columbia had this on the labels)
It was Les Paul who invented and advanced multi-track recording which later
enhanced stereo recording. Thanks Les! But did you know that (an unintentional)
stereo recording was produced in the twenties because of two persons,
one at stage left and one at stage right of ellington's bandstand were 
recording the same show(two mono recordings)..when these parallel recordings
were discovered(in the early 1990's) some one assembled them into a stereo
recording. Each side(track,recording....)was released as a separate recording
from separate companies(one american, one french). I use this piece of trivia
to convey the idea that stereo comes from mixing, and that early Pop stereo
was nothing but two mono signals placed apart from each other in order to
achieve sales from mono and the "peculiar" stereo enthusiasts. Those
Train records (stereo test albums)did nothing for me on my Mono record
player. But with the stereo Zenith in my parents den it was amazing. Of
course, we always took stereo beatles records and played with the
balance. You could sing along.
Enough treatise....

Enjoy!

ben
From: US30139@VM.CC.LATECH.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: ftp for info
Date: 21 Jul 92 21:40:44 GMT
Organization: LOUISIANA TECH UNIVERSITY

Would someone please list the ftp site and location at the site of the
rmb info like NEMS, Paul Is Dead, etc.  Also, is this a 24-hour ftp site
or after office hours?
 
PS  Give 'im hell, Bruce.
 
MJames
US30139@VM.CC.LATECH.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: hymowitz@whatever.cs.jhu.edu (Hymie!)
Subject: Re: People
Organization: Creative Sensualities dept, Jacquie's House of Underwear
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 12:16:09 GMT

am668@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Cleveland Law Library Assoc.) writes:
>
>People Magazine's July 27 issue has an article on the
>leading pop idols of the last fifty years. There is

hmph.  is one of them named m. d. chapman?

--hymie
hymowitz@cs.jhu.edu                                         hymie@jhuvms.bitnet
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Every time I see the Dakota, I think about that night.
Shots ringing out, the angry shout, a man losing his life. 
It's something we shouldn't dwell upon, but it's something we shouldn't ignore.
Too many good men have been cut down. Let's pray there won't be anymore.
--Christine Lavin
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: David.T.Greenfield@dartmouth.edu (David T. Greenfield)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: Hey Jude
Date: 31 Jul 92 16:13:34 GMT
 <1992Jul31.095114.3722@mr.med.ge.com>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH

In article <1992Jul31.095114.3722@mr.med.ge.com>
hinz@bonfire (David Hinz Mfg 4-6987) writes:

> I, for one, don't beleive in the 'sanctity of the creative process', or whatever
> the term was.  I feel that bootlegs are an excellent way to learn how
> they were thinking while writing songs.  One excellent example that leaps
> to mind is Let It Be.  I have ...um...heard a tape of Paul playing it to
> the group for what was obviously the first time (he was calling off the
> chords for them, which in itself was surprising, but I digress....).
> 
> It is quite interesting listening to the various takes of this song, and figuring
> out which were first, last, and which ones had parts which were culled/edited
> out.  There's an extra verse to "While My Guitar....", in which George sings
> something like "I look through the weeds at the play you are staging.....while 
> I'm sitting here doing  nothing but aging".  It seems to me he's commenting on
> his dissatisfaction with the group, and how it had turned into a situation
> where he felt he was losing control and just being used as a studio musician.
> 
> To say that bootlegs shouldn't exist is to say that these types of insights
> could never be known.  I, for one, would miss that.

Yes, the consumer finds a positive value in these items whether it's a
musician who can gain insights that will help in his/her own creative
process or just someone who "wants to know".  But, IMHO, we are in many
cases invading the artist's privacy in a manner akin to reading his/her
private mail or eavesdropping on a private conversation.  The artist
may have decided to withhold these materials (once again, excluding
public and/or broadcasted performances).  Many artists release whole
series of sketches in addition to a final work.  Sometimes they are
released posthumously by friends or family.  But if I record 10
versions of a song and only release one and if you gain possession of a
copy of the withheld material you are, in effect, holding stolen
property.  The same holds true for a recording which I choose to not
release in any form whatsoever.

Once again, my point is that it seems (IMHO) hypocritical to place
ourselves (those of us who buy bootlegs) above the merchants of pirates
and counterfeits.  This is a very painful and difficult issue for me. 
Leaving the personal benefits aside, is it possible to balance the
artistic, cultural and historical benefits to a society of making this
stuff available against an individual's right to privacy?  In the case
of bootlegs, the injustice done to the victim is not lessened by the
benefit done to others.

David
david.t.greenfield@dartmouth.edu
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: yyz@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (donald.w.coons)
Subject: Yoko Background Vocals
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 14:04:31 GMT

I just listened to Past Masters Volume 2 for the first time and really enjoyed
the version of Across the Universe. My question is did Yoko sing back-up vocals
for this song, it sounds like she did. Anybody know for sure? On this subject,
does anyone know what songs she participated on, I know you can hear her on
Bungalow Bill (if I remember right Paul fought to have her off this) and of
course Revolution 9, but what others.


On a totally unrelated note, anyone know when Beatlefest is in Chicago this
year, the dates will do. Thanks,

    Don Coons
    dwc@wnb3b2.att.com
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: franblan@leland.Stanford.EDU (Francois Marcel Blanc)
Subject: Re: Her Majesty
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 92 18:04:11 GMT

Just a thought. I always thought that the end should have truly been the end.
Among all the disconcerting things the fab have done, I always thought that
Her Majesty was not very accurate. Golden Slumbers + Carry that weight
+The end is such a masterpiece that the silence that follows still belongs to 
it. I wish it was not disturbed by a "silly" song. 

Any radically different opinions ?
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA