HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: Japanese Tears
From: ahoney@actrix.gen.nz (Allan Honey)
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 11:55:04 GMT
Organization: Actrix Information Exchange

In article <1992Jul27.032506.21080@menudo.uh.edu> edc@evolution.bchs.uh.edu (edward s. chen) writes:
> Believe it or not, Denny Laine's 1983 release "Japanese Tears" made it
> out on CD.  The disc is OR0069 from "Object Enterprises"  (Prestwich
> House, Caxton Way Watford, Hertfordshire WD1 8UF).  The name "Japanese
> Tears" is nowhere to be found on the packaging, and the name of the CD
> is apparently "DENNY LAINE featuring Paul McCartney: The Collection 
> [Including Go Now, Say You Don't Mind, and Many More]"
> 

[other stuff mysterious vanished...]

Completists may like to know that the same CD, complete with the same
tracks and track order is available on the Intertape label from France
(pressed by MPO).

The disc is called JAPANESE TEARS by Paul McCartney and Denny Laine
(sic).  The cover has pictures of Paul and Denny set against a Rising
Sun.

The catalog is INTER TAPE 500.002.

Which sounds best??  Dunno - never played either of them....

- Allan
-- 
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
DIGITAL                          ANALOG
ahoney@actrix.gen.nz             PO Box 37-208
Allan.Honey@bbs.actrix.gen.nz    Stokes Valley
From: stevedc@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Stephen Carter)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: If I Fell, mono vs. stereo
Date: 24 Jul 92 18:16:41 GMT
Organization: University of Sussex

From article <1992Jul17.200542.15787@news.columbia.edu>, by a-brenna@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan):
> In article <71139718520131@c00007-118dan.eos.ncsu.edu>
> jcsmith@eos.ncsu.edu (Jay C. Smith) writes:
> 
>>Just wondering, Dan:  do you have any ideas regarding Lewisohn's assertion 
>>that the single and album versions of "Get Back" are from two different 

> 
> I'm not Dan, but this is a good question.  I am sure the album version

HOw do we know?  YOu may be a splice or an alternate take?  :-)

Steve
From: stevedc@syma.sussex.ac.uk (Stephen Carter)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: "Taxman": new lyrics
Date: 23 Jul 92 07:21:29 GMT
Organization: University of Sussex

From article <1992Jul21.042605.6883@menudo.uh.edu>, by edc@evolution.bchs.uh.edu (edward s. chen):
> In article <BrHn2x.AnI@news.cso.uiuc.edu> rgp39716@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Rahul G. Patwari) writes:
>>
>>Don't ask me what I want it for  (Ha ha Mr. Major)
>>If you don't want to pay some more (????????????)
>>				    ^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
>                                  "ah ah Mr. Kinnock!"
> 
> This is a reference to current Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock.

Actually, Neil Kinnock has resigned as LaboUr Party leader and John
Smith has taken over...   :-)

Stephen Carter, Systems Manager, The Administration,
The University of Sussex, Falmer, Brighton BN1 9RH, UK
Tel: +44 273 678203  Fax: +44 273 678335     JANET: stevedc@uk.ac.sussex.syma
EARN/BITNET  : stevedc@syma.sussex.ac.uk      UUCP: stevedc@syma.uucp
ARPA/INTERNET: stevedc%syma.sussex.ac.uk@nsfnet-relay.ac.uk
From: hpky@gauguin.cc.rochester.edu (Hanan Polanski)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: Her Majesty
Date: 23 Jul 92 01:44:03 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <1992Jul22.180411.15434@leland.Stanford.EDU> franblan@leland.Stanford.EDU (Francois Marcel Blanc) writes:

>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 ?

Yes!

I think the endings of both sides are wonderful!!!

I think you are totally accurate when you call GC/CTW/TE a masterpiece.
But... (IMHO) part of the Beatles' charm is the balance they strike up.
The medley *is* grand and sweeping and majestic.  But to end the album
with it would seem (again IMHO of course) too pompous and heavy-handed.
What better place for such a silly little snip of a song, than to take
a bit of wind out of such a "Big Musical Statement"?? 

As always, if you don't like it, you've got 18 seconds to turn off the
stereo (or is it mono?). I-) I-)

				James Willer email to jmw1388@cs.rit.edu
{The opinions above are probably NOT those of
 Hanan Polansky. I don't know. I never asked.}
From: hpky@dali.cc.rochester.edu (Hanan Polanski)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: to Chris bbs.oit.unc.edu 152.2.22.80
Date: 23 Jul 92 19:44:35 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <1992Jul23.081527.911@msus1.msus.edu> l00022@TIGGER.STCLOUD.MSUS.EDU writes:

>Chris,
>I was reading your article about the strange record you have.  You mentioned astrange "Phil and Ronnie" on this 'bootleg'.  I may be wrong, but it could refer to Phil Spector, a producer of many later beatle records, and Ronnie Hawkins, a guy that <i know nothing about, but a guy who John does a promotional bit for 
>on a single that I have obtained in my beatles collection.  I would be curious to find out any other information on this, too.

I think you got it half right. Try Phil Spector + (his wife) Ronnie
Spector....
		(did you ever hear of the "Ronettes"??)
I-) I-) I-0 I-) 

			James Willer email to jmw1388@cs.rit.edu
{The opinions above are probably NOT those of
 Hanan Polansky. I don't know. I never asked.}
From: lester@soldev.tti.com (jim)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: People
Summary: Where was Mark Lindsay?
Date: 29 Jul 92 23:55:46 GMT
Organization: Transaction Technology Inc.

In article <1992Jul29.124008.14271@usenet.ins.cwru.edu> 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.

Upon visually scanning this issue in the market, my girlfriend was aghast
that there was no picture of Mark Lindsay of "Paul Revere & the Raiders"
fame.  Did she just miss it, or was this a major omission?
Of course they didn't forget the major hunk Jerry Garcia.

OBC:  Any further info on the proposed Dylan tribute concerts in October?
      Is it planned only for MSG?  Will George appear?

Jim
Jim Lester  (an employee)               Citicorp slash TTI
90405  (310)450-9111, x2209             {csun,philabs}!ttidca!lester
			 "Thunder is good, thunder is impressive,
			  but it is lightning that does the work."  - M. Twain
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: sjked@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Subject: Polish Beatles Tapes
Reply-To: sjked@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 20:58:46 GMT

Recently, my father went to Poland, and brought me back every 
Beatles tape he could find. They were only $1 each! Anyway,
On the "A Hard Day's Night" tape, the songs on the second side
are totally different from the songs on the second side of my
original Beatles record! The record even has instrumental versions
of the songs. To make things even more confusing, the same CD has
yet a third order of songs! What's going on?
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: jcsmith@eos.ncsu.edu (Jay C. Smith)
Subject: Re: Hey Jude
Organization: North Carolina State University, Project Eos
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 17:11:21 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.213852.22624@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> 
David.T.Greenfield@dartmouth.edu (David T. Greenfield) writes:
>By buying these bootlegs we are, in
>many cases, cooperating in the subversion of the artist(s)'s right to
>privacy in the creative process, a process I consider sacred,
>especially in the case of The Beatles.

Well put.  I wholeheartedly agree.  Yes, we all love bootlegs, if only it 
means that there's a nearly continuous flow of *new* Beatles material for 
the diehard fanatics.

But what turns me off is when people blast Paul or anyone else for complaining
about the bootlegs.  Some people just don't understand that a bootleg not
only constitutes a theft, but also a breach of privacy.  I suppose some people
would be flattered if their notes, scribblings, and doodles were copied and
sold at a profit.  But once the flattery wears off, one could easily become
incensed at how one had lost control over one's creative products.

Hey, people complain about Nike using "Revolution" or "Instant Karma," 
presumably because it corrupts an image of the Beatles and John Lennon,
but also because, at least in the case of the former, it was done against
the wishes of at least George and Paul.  Why isn't the same complaint 
against bootlegs valid?  

Is it the "men in suits" syndrome?  That it's easier to criticize big-
company Nike for making money that way than it is to criticize those
heroic individuals dedicated to bringing those bootlegs to us fans?
And those bootleg "heroes" are also working under threat of prosecution
by big-company EMI-Capitol (not to mention the even bigger and possibly
more hated FBI, remembered as spying on John Lennon for Nixon)....

Needless to say, I find the moral questions involved in bootlegs to be an
issue for which there is no easy answer.  Bootlegs are wrong, but at the same 
time I'd hate to see them eradicated.

--
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: dmaclaug@agsm.ucla.edu (saki)
Subject: Re: Whitburn
Organization: UCLA, Anderson Graduate School Of Management
Distribution: usa
Date: 24 Jul 92 12:32:42 PDT

In article <0095DD29.5DA85BC0@Msu.oscs.montana.edu> alisg@Msu.oscs.montana.edu writes:
>In article <22430@hacgate.SCG.HAC.COM>, rlich@atr-19.scg.hac.com writes:
>>Anyone have any insight as to why one of the most successful Lennon/McCartney
>>giveaways, Peter and Gordon's _World Without Love_, has never been heard
>>as performed by the boys?
>>
>>This was a tremendously popular tune.  It was number 1 in the USA for 11
>>weeks, according to WHITBURN.  
>
>I don't know who WHITBURN is, but "World Without Love" was at number 1 in the
>U.S. for 1 week, the week of June 27th, 1964. At least, so says _The Billboard
>Book of Number One Hits_ by Fred Bronson. Is Whitburn wrong, or was this  
>a typo by you or the original author?

It must be a typo. "World Without Love" could not have been Number 1
for eleven weeks; even the Beatles' first singles weren't in the top
position that long.

"Whitburn" is actually "Joel Whitburn's Top Pop Singles, 1955-86", an
amalgamation of Billboard chart information, including groups' chart
action. It's a fairly standard (if expensive) reference source, published
by Record Research Inc. in Wisconsin. Whitburn also edited other sourcebooks
combining slightly different information (top albums, top 100's, one-hit
wonders, etc.) Much of the information in Whitburn is also available in
cheaper editions such as the Bronson Billboard publications.

Now the real question is: has anyone heard the Bobby Rydell cover of
"World Without Love"? It actually got airplay in my radio market before
Peter & Gordon made their mark.

--
"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)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: bl2m+@andrew.cmu.edu (Benjamin D. Lukoff)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: Multi-track recording
Date: 22 Jul 92 15:12:41 GMT
	<5005@transfer.stratus.com>
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

First....I don't think Bruce's last posting was either a flame, or an
uncivil statement, and I am glad.
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
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: raindrop@leland.Stanford.EDU (Nathaniel Michael Pearson)
Subject: Re: Yoko Background Vocals
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 01:15:35 GMT

In article <1540f5INN86g@function.mps.ohio-state.edu> ralley@function.mps.ohio-state.edu (Thomas G Ralley) writes:
>In article <1992Jul28.144910.24445@udel.edu> galuska@oz.asel.udel.edu (Scott Galuska) writes:
>
>>Yoko is not on "Across The Universe" ('twas a couple of girls who hung out
>>outside of Abbey Road (or was it Apple) studios). 
>Gryleen Pease and Lizzie Bravo, who were 16 and 17 respectively at the time.
>There's no mention of payment. I wonder if they got union wages for their
>work...:)
>
>David Ralley
>
>-- 
>One weighs the value of rules           |David Ralley
>by letting them occasionally suffer     |ralley@function.mps.ohio-state.edu
>an exception -- Richard Wagner          |sometimes you gotta break the rules
>@#$%^&*()!@#$%^&*()!@#$%^&*()!@#$%^&*()!@#$%^&*()!@#$%%^&*Burger King &**&^^

Lizzie Bravo's name appears in the credits on Paul Simon's recent "Rhythm of
the Saints" as a contributor of Portuguese lyrics (appropriate, as she is
Brazilian, if memory serves).  I wonder if she's been in the music business
all these years?

Similarly, I think it's Peter Blake's signature on the cover of Eric Clapton's
new "24 Nights" (recorded, fittingly, in the Albert Hall).

On a sadder note, I was glancing at postings recently when the word "Dakota"
caught my eye.  Shuddering a moment later, I ran through Paul's lyrics and
storyline in "Rocky Raccoon."  Dakota.  A rented room. Two men and a woman.   
A confrontation...shots fired...Well, you get the picture.  I wouldn't call it
prophetic, of course, but I got the same eerie feeling as I did watching
that innocent scene in "Help!" when a young John Lennon is forced to throw up 
his hands in a stickup at Buckingham Palace.  I hope I'm not shamelessly 
exploiting the strong emotions felt by all of us about a terrible moment in
modern history; I know its a common tendency to interpret lyrics in strange
ways, but this was a weird, tense moment of realization.  Even if lyrics
mean nothing, there are some events which shape our very outlooks and 
influence forever our perceptions of even a single word.  

				Nat Pearson
				raindrop@leland.stanford.edu










Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: edc@evolution.bchs.uh.edu (edward s. chen)
Subject: Re: Hey Jude
Organization: Little to none, or maybe not......
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1992 04:53:43 GMT

In article <gilmore-280792172752@mezzmac170.engin.umich.edu.> gilmore@um.cc.umich.edu (Frederick Gilmore) writes:
>In article <1992Jul27.191117.25667@athena.mit.edu>, njblock@athena.mit.edu
>(Ned Block) wrote:
>> 
>Well, as someone has already noted, there is no EMI release for this thing.
> However, an outfit out of Ipswich, MA called "Fab and Gear" is offering
>another one of those box sets in the vein of last year's Yesterday and
>Today CD.  These are not officially sanctioned and the prices are
                  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>exorbitant.  It is a CD release of the Hey Jude LP on CD.  

It is not only "not officially sanctioned", it is being done without the
permission of the Beatles, EMI, or Capitol, and the boys receive no money
from the sale of the disc.

>I will attempt
>to fish the info on this thing out of the trash.  If I recall, the going
>price was $70 and included an alternate shot of the cover (not all that
>exciting when one considers Ethan Russell has been
>peddling his pix through outlets like Rockaway Records for some time now). 

Not to mention that the CD is mastered from a vinyl disc.  Can we say
"counterfeit" (or alternatively "pirate") boys and girls?  [...and much
like "Yesterday...and Today", not even an interesting one]  A very definite
avoid at all costs.

<ESC>


-- 
..You either kiss the future or the past goodbye...
                          -- Ringo Starr (written by O'Deherty / Velez)
From: hpky@gauguin.cc.rochester.edu (Hanan Polanski)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: Analog Beatles
Date: 22 Jul 92 03:52:41 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <1992Jul21.230512.25650@midway.uchicago.edu> enf1@ellis.uchicago.edu (Eric Fischer) asks:

>>But then again, I miss the false take at
>>the beginning of "I'm Looking Through You"....

>speaking of which, what is the story with this?  I hadn't noticed it until a
>few days ago when I was comparing my mono and stereo Rubber Soul LPs (both
>US Capitol) and this suddenly stuck out like a sore thumb, though a pleasant
>one.  Do I understand correctly that the EMI LPs and CDs don't include this?
>I looked for a reference in Lewisohn, but couldn't find one... does anyone
>know the story?

My impression (after hearing the "correct" version) is that it was the
opening notes from an aborted mix or tape-copy that got accidentally stuck
onto the beginning of the tape during Capitol's mastering...
(I always thought it was rather charming and quite endearing.)

Anyone else care to contribute?

>Thanks!

You're welcome.

				James Willer at hpky@gauguin.cc.rochester.edu
					OR jmw1388@cs.rit.edu
{The opinions above are probably not those of
 Hanan Polansky. I don't know. I never asked.}
From: edc@dawn.cs.rice.edu (Edward Chen)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: Who wrote what?  Does it matter?
Date: 24 Jul 92 16:11:30 GMT
Article-I.D.: rice.1992Jul24.161130.8573
Organization: Rice University, Houston

In article <1992Jul24.094548.22299@mr.med.ge.com> hinz@bonfire (David Hinz Mfg 4-6987) writes:
>In the book 'the Playboy Interviews", John and the interviewer go over the
>albums one by one, discussing each song in some detail, as I recall.  It's
>a good addition to any collection, check it out!
>

While we are agreed that the David Sheff interview (the entire thing, not
just the last quarter) is an invaluable reference work, and a damn fine
(and fun) read, I have trouble accepting John's word as to "who wrote what
when" with regards to these songs.   A prime example of this is "Eleanor
Rigby", where John's and Pete Shotton's stories differ rather drastically.
(Similarly, I take John's comments concerning George's Beatle songs with
a grain of salt, as John was still upset over being snubbed in "I Me Mine")

The reason for this is a combination of things.  John had a notoriously bad
memory.  Additionally, John often let his passions of the moment color his
judgement (as to what he will or will not say).  The rampant revisionism that
saki accuses Doctor Macca of is not intentionally present, but it is still 
there.

For the record, Dowdling's _Beatlesongs!_ collects a lot of pieces from
interviews, etc concerning "who wrote what", but his assigning "percentages
of song authorship"  is rather suspect.

<ESC>
 

-- 
.. newspaper taxis appear on the shore, waiting to take you away ...
From: bad@pismo.sw.stratus.com (Bruce Dumes)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: Multi-track recording
Date: 21 Jul 92 18:02:44 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering

In article <weP20hi00awAI5_HdU@andrew.cmu.edu> bl2m+@andrew.cmu.edu (Benjamin D. Lukoff) writes:
>
>	You may not think I know anything, but one thing I *do* know about is
>recording.  Two-track is stereo as far as record players are concerned,
>if the recording is mixed that way, with one channel far left, and one
>far right. Bruce said in a letter to me which I have forwarded to the
>channel "Two track is NOT stereo. It's multi-track recording with two
>tracks only". Ah...well, that goes for "Sgt. Pepper" (multi-track
>recording with four tracks only), as well as, say, "Dear Prudence" (with
>eight tracks). TRUE stereo can only be gotten with a stereo mike pair. 
>Multi-track will never be TRUE stereo, it is just a collection of
>monophonic signals mixed to resemble stereo. If anyone wishes to respond
>to this CIVILLY without insulting me, please do so,  otherwise, bye.
>
>Benjamin Lukoff   bl2m+@andrew.cmu.edu
>Carnegie-Mellon University, Pittsburgh
>
>---A true Beatles fan, contrary to what Bruce says


You have given the answer here:

	Two-track is stereo as far as record players are concerned,
	if the recording is mixed that way.

Recording on a two track was NOT recorded with two mikes in front of
the band, one on the left, one on the right. Individual inputs from each
mike and instrument were mixed into two channels, with, for the most part,
instruments on one channel, and voices on the other.  This was done so
that the voices could be optimally mixed before blending them in with the
instruments.

This is why two track recording is just like four track or eight track,
but with only two tracks to work with.

To say that a multi-track recording could never be true stereo seems a
little silly to me.  If you think that this is a flame, or an uncivil
statement, I deeply and humbly apologize. 

Bruce "truly ashamed and humbled to be in the presence of a true fan" Dumes


-- 
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
From: rjones+@pitt.edu (Randy Jones)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: Beatles Songs in 3/4
Keywords: Beatles Songs 3/4
Date: 24 Jul 92 20:12:33 GMT
Organization: University of Pittsburgh

In article <1992Jul20.182950.12591@oclc.org> rms@oclc.org (Russ Schnall) writes:
|I was trying to remember which Beatles' songs are written in 3/4 time.
|4/4 and its variants seem to be the most predominant today.  Any ideas why 3/4
|time is not used so much?

Because if it has a back-beat, you can't lose it :-)
From: hpky@okeeffe.cc.rochester.edu (Hanan Polanski)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: Beatles' record impact etc..
Date: 31 Jul 92 20:08:35 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <1992Jul31.171114.20278@mtu.edu> psbapat@mtu.edu (BAPAT) writes:

>> Well, in the "It's 04:00 and I haven't slept in 30 hours" collection, it's on
>> Rubber Soul.  So there.
>> 
>> P.S.  OOPS.  How embarassing.  I guess it would be safe to say, at this point,
>> on the topic of damage control, that I consider Rubber Soul AND Revolver
>> to be the peak of the Beatles' carrers, musically.  Just my opinion.
>> 

>I have just been informed that the British release of Rubber Soul
>does not contain AYBCS but the American release does. AYBCS is in 
>Revolver (again a British release) and that is the cassette I have.

Actually, AYBCS was included on neither Rubber Soul or Revolver,
but the (in)famous "Yesterday...And Today"!! 

					James Willer email to jmw1388@cs.rit.edu
{The above opinions are probably NOT those of
 Hanan Polansky. I don't know. I never asked.}
From: bad@pismo.sw.stratus.com (Bruce Dumes)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: Stereo vs. Twin-track and other recording nits
Date: 31 Jul 92 13:30:08 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering

In article <1992Jul31.100257.3990@mr.med.ge.com> hinz@bonfire (David Hinz Mfg 4-6987) writes:
>AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAArgh!  Enough already!
>

Actually, since the discussion has evolved into a scholarly one, 
(Thanks, Joe!) I think it's become quite fascinating.  Many of us are
very interested in the details of how the Beatles recorded.  

If you are not, you can "just say 'n'". :-)

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