HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: randall@informix.com (Randall Rhea)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: The Fabs first EMI contract
Date: 6 Oct 92 00:49:38 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

dlm3@quads.uchicago.edu (saki) writes:
>No question that Martin was considering whether the Boys would be
>better as cover artists or front-men for other songwriters, but he was
>obliging enough to tell them that when they wrote material as good as
>"How Do You Do It?", he'd be happy to produce it. It took only till
>their second session, 11 September, to convince Martin that "Love Me
>Do" might have its own natural, unique charm...and only one more
>recording session (26 November) to convince all who heard it that
>"Please Please Me" was a sure-fire number-one.

Martin makes an interesting comment in "The Making of Sgt. Pepper":

   John and Paul couldn't write a good song at all when they started.
   "Love Me Do" was the best they could come up with.  The blossoming
   of their songwriting talent later was remarkable.

He was speaking the truth.  The Lennon-McCartney songs on the Decca
audition tapes were, shall we say, a bit primitive. (read: bad)
"Hello Little Girl" was probably their best one, and perhaps
Martin saw some commercial appeal to it.  Others such as "Like
Dreamers Do" had little or no appeal at all.  Naturally, after hearing
the Decca stuff, Martin was reluctant to allow them to record their
own compositions, so he made them record "How Do You Do It".  
One of the great bits of genius from George Martin was the fact
that he went ahead and let them record "Love Me Do", which, in
both of our humble opinions, was not a great song.  It was a hit
on the charts, thanks partly to Brian Epstein and his buying up
of several thousand copies of the record.

This recording encouraged John and Paul to continue with their 
songwriting, and we all know how that turned out.  What if Martin 
had refused to record any Lennon-McCartney numbers ? ..... 
What if "How Do You Do It" by the Beatles had been released ... 
it probably would have been a hit, then what?  Would the Fabs have 
been forced to do covers forever? It's a bit scary to speculate.


-- 

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Randall Rhea                                        Informix Software, Inc. 
Project Manager, MIS Sales/Marketing Systems    uunet!pyramid!infmx!randall
From: prokopy@en.ecn.purdue.edu (Dave)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: Gems from Lewisohn's "Chron"
Date: 27 Sep 92 23:13:42 GMT
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network

In article <9209272253.AA02212@ray.met.fsu.edu> dave@RAY.MET.FSU.EDU (Dave Faciane) writes:
>In article <1992Sep27.051117.20771@midway.uchicago.edu> dlm3@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>>In article <1992Sep22.174021.20238@news.columbia.edu> brennan@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan) writes:
>>>Items from Lewisohn's new "The Complete Beatles Chronicle"--
>>>--The mono and stereo "Help!" (the song) are the same take, not
>>>different vocal takes.  Lewisohn says they were "edited" differently,
>>>whatever that could mean.  I don't understand this one.
>>Pshaw and double-pshaw. These are two different vocal takes; I'll
>>stake money on it. All Lewisohn has to do is listen to the phrasing
>>in John's delivery---it's different in the lyric "And I do appreciate
>>you bein' 'round" (listen to the pronunciation of "do" in particular
>>on both mono and stereo). Even if Lewisohn argues that these could
>>be "edited" (and why would they be, pray tell?), the grittiness of
>>the stereo vocals (as opposed to a smoother mono take)---there's
>>a tangible desperation in that stereo version---would belie any
>>existing documentation, if there is any.
>I believe that there are, in fact, two vocal takes side by side on
>the master tape. Listen to Help tk 9 on UM6; there are obviously 
>two (maybe three) Lennon vocals in the mix. I'll bet that for the 
>mono mix one of these vocals was mixed out. This take is not too
>far removed from the one that was actually used in the stereo mix, 
>i.e, they hadn't added a few things (I don't have it here to listen 
>to, and I don't recall what was missing). 

That's the other thing I forgot that's different: there's no tambourine
on the mono mix.  It IS possible that it's a different mix from the same
master (deleting a vocal, and probably the tambourine).  The final (stereo)
version does sound like a double-tracked lead.  I guess we'd have to have
the original tapes to listen to, wouldn't we?


>
>
>
>
>
>
>David Faciane        | "I was just singing it in the toilet so I think
>dave@ray.met.fsu.edu |  I should get it --Lennon, Abbey Road, 1965


-- 
( David Prokopy - prokopy@en.ecn.purdue.edu                                 )
( "Well now, what can a poor boy do, 'cept to sing for a rock-n-roll band?" )
(  -The Rolling Stones, "Street Fighting Man"                               )
From: edc@evolution.bchs.uh.edu (edward s. chen)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: THRILLINGTON
Date: 30 Sep 92 20:53:29 GMT
Organization: Little to none, or maybe not......

In article <1992Sep30.191237.12690@news.columbia.edu> brennan@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan) writes:
>In article <717832871.0@selene.FidoNet.Org>
>Val.Thomas@f99.n121.z1.FidoNet.Org (Val Thomas) writes:
>
>> I obtained a copy of Thrillington at Beatlefest in Chicago 2 years
>> ago.  It was put out by Goblin Records CD 3005.  It states made in
>> Austrailia.  The address of the company is 179 George Wharf Road;
>> Sydney NWS 2010.
>
>A bootleg of course.  Made in Australia?  Yeah right.
>

Yes, it is indeed a bootleg.  I wrote an article on the "real out of print
albums appearing on bootleg" phenomena sometime early this year.  Technically,
these are not "bootlegs", but instead "counterfeits" with "bonus tracks" added.
Unfortunately I didn't save a copy of the article, so it has disappeared into
the mythical r.m.b. archives...

>The rest really is from Thrillington (I suppose!) except--

Yes, it is indeed the complete Thrillington album, as originally released.
Even the cover art was reproduced in its entirety.  A nice touch.

>
>>28-35  Family Way Soundtrack
>
>...which is presumably a major part of that (which is more than 8
>tracks, I think).

No, it is the complete soundtrack  (which runs slightly less then 25 minutes).
The track listings may be different, but it is definitely all there.  For
someone curious to hear the music, this isn't a horrible value, as the 
"Thrillington" LP on vinyl would easily run you the $25.00, while the
"The Family Way" soundtrack would run you an additional $10.00 - $15.00.

<ESC>

-- 
..You either kiss the future or the past goodbye...
                          -- Ringo Starr (written by O'Deherty / Velez)
From: ross-c@scs.leeds.ac.uk (R Clement)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: The Beatles Reunions 74 & 92
Date: 3 Oct 92 19:18:27 GMT
Organization: The University of Leeds, School of Computer Studies
Originator: ross-c@csparc2

I've just bought a CD called:

The Beatles Reunions 74 & 92.

The '74 part has the band: John Lennon, Paul McCartney, Stevie Wonder
			   Jessie Ed Davis, Harry Neilson (sic),
			   Bobby Keyes.
And the songs: 1) Studio Play (warming up)
	       2) Blues Jam
	       3) Talk Part (guess!)
	       4) Lucille
	       5) Nightmares
	       6) Stand by me (A)
	       7) Stand by me (B)
	       8) Stand by me (C)
	       9) A Medley (Cupid, Chain Gang, Take this hammer)

The '92 part has the band: George Harrison, Ringo Starr
(not mentioned, but Gary Moore is announced on the tape).

Does anyone know if the '74 part is for real? I suspect a fake somehow.
For one the quality is a bit too good. What I think may have happened is
that they took rehersal tapes for Rock and Roll, and overdubbed someone
who sounds sorta like Macca onto it. Then, it might be real. Does anyone
know if Macca dropped in on the R&R sessions at any time. What about 
Stevie Wonder?

Thanks in anticipation,

Ross-c
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: williasr@NeXTwork.Rose-Hulman.Edu (Steven R. Williams)
Subject: Re: Ono and rotary phones
Organization: Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 21:24:48 GMT


> i don't want to get involved in a Yoko flamefest and no  but the ONOBOX  
ticks me off.
>  Compare it to the LENNON box. John gets 4
You make it sound like it was Yoko's fault that John's box set was only 4  
CD's....
I doubt that the fact that Lennon only got a 4CD box set has anything to  
do with Ono (although anythings possible)...By the way, I do like some of  
Yoko's music, just not on John's albums....

Also, I do remember the sound of rotary phones (we still have them back  
home in Southeast Indiana) and I'd hardly consider myself an old  
rmb'er....wasn't even born until after the breakup (sob)....Come Together  
does not remind me of rotary phones.

Article 3: 
Does anyone have any suggestions for Beatle Poll 3....I'm looking for a  
few good yes/no or multiple choice questions or perhaps a question about  
Revolver....or maybe a question about Beatles cover versions  of others  
songs (does anyone have a list of these?) ...and I don't mean cover  
versions of Beatles songs....although this might be interesting too....

Thanks,
Steven R. Williams


-williasr@nextwork.rose-hulman.edu
------------------------------------------------------
"I don't understand how I got delayed, I should be sailing today on the  
liner...was kicked in the *** on a dock of Chang-Sei,(it's) no way for a  
man to see China...."
From: schauerte@moe.gmr.com (Frank Schauerte)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: "I Can't Hide"
Date: 1 Oct 92 19:45:32 GMT
Organization: GM Research Labs, Warren, MI

In article <BvD4JC.64r@nic.umass.edu> EDIAS@deimos.ucc.umass.edu (EMILIANO A DIAS)
writes (29 Sep 1992):
>OBFav Beatle's Story:  Supposedly, when the Beatles first met Bob Dylan, he
>was really impressed that they said ,"I get high" in "I Want to Hold Your Hand"
>They replied that they weren't singing "I get high", they were singing,
>"I can't hide" to which Bob replied, "Why would you want to hide from a girl?"

If one looks at the Beatle's appearances on the Ed Sullivan show, captured on
the video THE BEATLES FIRST U.S. VISIT, one can hear them sing "I can't hide"
rather than "I get high" during a performance of "I Want to Hold Your Hand". 
I had always thought they were just being kind to Ed and American television.
Remember the problem Ed had with Elvis' hips!


-- 
_________________________________________________________
Frank Schauerte--E and Electronics E Dept
General Motors Research Labs;    email=>schauerte@gmr.com
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: sjk6119@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Scott J. Kleper)
Subject: remakes
Reply-To: sjk6119@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 00:53:15 GMT

I don't know exactly why, but I always hate hearing remakes of 
Beatles' songs. Maybe it's because there's no need to mess with
perfection. What do you all think about them? (For example, I 
_hated_ Debbie Gibson's (or was it Tiffany's) I saw _Him_ Standing
There. (I guess I hated her anyway, tho.) :-)

-Scott
From: rlwilliams@gallua.gallaudet.edu
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: remakes
Date: 30 Sep 92 13:44:45 GMT
Organization: Gallaudet University

In article <1992Sep29.005315.14361@ultb.isc.rit.edu>, sjk6119@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Scott J. Kleper) writes:
> I don't know exactly why, but I always hate hearing remakes of 
> Beatles' songs. Maybe it's because there's no need to mess with
> perfection. What do you all think about them? (For example, I 
> _hated_ Debbie Gibson's (or was it Tiffany's) I saw _Him_ Standing
> There. (I guess I hated her anyway, tho.) :-)
> 
> -Scott
======
I guess I just like the music so much that I like it by other people too... 
The Sweethearts of the Rodeo have a version out of "I feel fine," it's 
kinda neat.  No worse than all the remakes of Elvis songs in Honeymoon in 
Vegas.  

for some reason, I didn't like Any of the remakes in the Sargent Pepper 
movie...

skip
From: bsk@acsu.buffalo.edu (Brian S. Kazmierczak)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: remakes (Techno)
Date: 29 Sep 92 16:22:52 GMT
Organization: UB

In article <1992Sep29.005315.14361@ultb.isc.rit.edu> sjk6119@ritvax.isc.rit.edu writes:
>I don't know exactly why, but I always hate hearing remakes of 
>Beatles' songs. Maybe it's because there's no need to mess with
>perfection. What do you all think about them? (For example, I 
>_hated_ Debbie Gibson's (or was it Tiffany's) I saw _Him_ Standing
>There. (I guess I hated her anyway, tho.) :-)
>

(Yes, I am still alive and reading.. just being very quiet!)

I've been meaning to post this, and this sounded like a good chance, since
it is sort of on the subject..

Does anyone have any opinion on the Techno songs made from Beatles songs? The
only ones I have heard so far are "Hey Jude" (Paul's actual recording) with
a techno beat added, and "Eleanor Rigby" (not Paul singing, but pretty close
duplication) with a techno beat and a bit of original techno music thrown in.

I don't particularly like the "Hey Jude" on, but the "Eleanor Rigby" one
was not that bad. Anyone have any opinions or know of any others? (or know
of the DJs/"groups" that did these mixes??)


>-Scott


Brian
From: tahonen@katk.Helsinki.FI (Timo Ahonen)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: McCartney II CD bonus tracks
Date: 1 Oct 92 14:10:06 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki, Computing Centre

In article <1992Sep29.160028.11675@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> jwlr@dali.cc.rochester.edu (James Willer) writes:

>bohy6489@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:

>>Not to pick nits, but I have seen several CD copies of McCartney II in stores
>>with "Check my Machine" and "Secret Friend" (possibly another, I don't recall
>>and don't have the CD, *yet*).  These to songs are *not* on my vinyl copy of
>>McCartney II.

>I have never heard "Secret Friend", as I don't have the CD yet, either.
>I think it was originally on a very limited edition 12" promo for
>"Temporary Secretary".

TS was a limited edition 12", yes, but an official release, not promo. 
"Secret Friend" is very much in the same style as TS, but longer........

> I know that it is one of the *longest* songs
>he's ever recorded. (perhaps THE, but the 'dance' versions of "Goodnight
>Tonight" or "No More Lonely Nights" are also in the running. I really
>think SF is longer, but I don't have any reference handy, so I'm hedging.)

Neville Stannard's "Paperback Writers" claim it's THE longest one, but 
that's pre-"Pipes of Peace" only.

Timo Ahonen               *  To do is to be              - Socrates  *
University of Helsinki    *  To be is to do              - Sartre    *
Finland                   *  Do be do be do              - Sinatra   *
Timo.Ahonen@Helsinki.FI   *  Be do do be do do be do do  - Silencers *
From: jwlr@escher.cc.rochester.edu (James Willer)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: more Come Together
Date: 1 Oct 92 19:42:08 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

>>Just one more opinion before letting the subject die...
>>
>>When I was first hearing Come Together (at the tender
>>age of 5 or 6) it always sounded to me like they were
>>imitating the sound of a telephone dialing.
>>
>>Anyone else ever get that impression from CT? (I know
>>*some* of you older rmb'ers remember rotary phones...)

>In a word, no! :-)

Just thought I'd ask...

>And James, if you were only 5 or 6 when Come Together came out, I'd 
>hardly put you in with the "older rmb'ers". :-) Actually, a town adjacent 
>to mine still doesn't have touch tone service!

Well, I never *said* I was one of them. I-)

			James Willer
{the opinions above are probably NOT those of
 anyone at all}
From: randall@informix.com (Randall Rhea)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: remakes
Date: 29 Sep 92 22:18:16 GMT
Organization: Informix Software, Inc.

sjk6119@ritvax.isc.rit.edu (Scott J. Kleper) writes:

>I don't know exactly why, but I always hate hearing remakes of 
>Beatles' songs. Maybe it's because there's no need to mess with
>perfection. What do you all think about them? (For example, I 
>_hated_ Debbie Gibson's (or was it Tiffany's) I saw _Him_ Standing
>There. (I guess I hated her anyway, tho.) :-)

The only Beatles' remakes I like are:

1. Sergio Mendes and Brasil 66- "Fool on the Hill", "With A Little
Help From My Friends".  An interesting bossa-nova twist that really
wakes up "Fool".

2. Joe Cocker- "With a Little Help From My Friends"  How could
he go wrong, with Jimmy Page on guitar?  This is probably the
best-known remake, as it appears as the theme song of the
TV series "The Wonder Years".

3. Macca- all Beatles tracks on the -Unplugged- CD. (I guess
we can call these remakes, huh?)

4. Mommas and Papas- "I Call Your Name"  (not nearly as good
as the original, but good.)


I really do not like Elton's "Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds", which
was the Fabs remake that did the best on the charts.  Yuck.

-- 

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Randall Rhea                                        Informix Software, Inc. 
Project Manager, MIS Sales/Marketing Systems    uunet!pyramid!infmx!randall
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: a70901@uwasa.fi (Mikko Suhonen)
Subject: "Let It Be" on video?
Organization: University of Vaasa, Finland
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 18:21:01 GMT

Is the film Let It Be released as a video in Pal format?
All the other Beatles-films have been issued on video here in Europe,
but I haven't seen Let It Be anywhere.
I have been searching for it here in Finland, in Stockholm and in London.

If it is not available, does anybody know, if it is going to be 
released in near future?

Please answer me via E-mail.

-- 

Mikko Suhonen
Vaasa, Finland
(a70901@chyde.uwasa.fi)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: mcodogno@nyx.cs.du.edu (Maurizio Codogno)
Subject: Which is the English version of Chronicles?
Followup-To:  mau@beatles.cselt.stet.it
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sun, 4 Oct 92 20:12:42 GMT


I would like to buy the book, and for me it's simpler to get it in
UK... could someone please send me the complete data necessary to place 
an order?
 
ciao! .mau.

Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: ben@media.mit.edu (Benjamin Kline Lowengard)
Subject: Re: remakes or covers?
Organization: MIT Media Laboratory
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1992 13:58:13 GMT

In article <1992Sep30.181848.17154@math.ucla.edu> dmac@julia.math.ucla.edu (saki) writes:
>In article <1aabsnINN3lf@agate.berkeley.edu> bh@anarres.CS.Berkeley.EDU (Brian Harvey) writes:
>>There aren't just two categories (singer/songwriter and coverer of 
>others' songs).
>
>A good point here too, since terminology can be misleading. Cover version
>is the correct term when we refer to someone doing a followup version
>of another singer's song. But Little Eva wasn't strictly doing a "cover"
>of Goffin/King's "Locomotion", since they'd not sung their own version.
>There *was* a cover of "Locomotion" in the seventies...oh dear, memory
>fails, some heavy-metal band.
That would be Grand Funk Railroad.


>"joke" cover of a Beatles song, like The Bobs, who do acapella vocals
>(viz., no instruments) of "You Can't Do That" and "Helter Skelter".

You know,the Beatles have influences just about everyone, I always thought
it funny when folks perceive all artists do their own tunes (i.e. Tiffiny
 as author of I saw her standing there, or Hendrix as author of 
Dylan's All along the Watchtower) 

Let's not discount the fact that the Beatles were SONGWRITERS! It is 
a tribute to them that so many versions of their songs are out there.
(what about Benatar's "Helter Skelter" Belew's "I'm Down" etc. these are
pretty good and they are obviously very influences by the B's)
benj
From: bad@pismo.sw.stratus.com (Bruce Dumes)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: Onobox question
Date: 2 Oct 92 12:43:42 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Software Engineering

In article <1992Oct1.154113.2874@wkuvx1.bitnet> shroymp@wkuvx1.bitnet (Mike Shroyer ) writes:
>In article <6917@transfer.stratus.com>, bad@pismo.sw.stratus.com (Bruce Dumes) writes:
>> Obligatory Beatles Comment(Rhetorical):
>> 
>> Was John Lennon *not* a musican when he couldn't tune his own guitar?
>
>Yes ... it just means that his ear wasn't that good.
>
>I think i phrased that wrong.  Just because he can't tune his guitar
>doesn't make him *not* a musician.  I have considered myself a
>musician for a long time (Middle school/high school/college bands and
>now guitar/bass/piano) but i am just now getting my ear trained enough to
>tune a guitar *well* without a tuner.


Can we say "rhetorical", as in a question to which no answer is expected?

Of course he was a musician, that was precisely the point which was so
obvious.  It was said to bolster my point that Yoko must be considered
a musician, whether or not she can sing in tune (or CHOOSES to sing in
tune).  

Like I said before, I'm not particularly enamored by Yoko's music.  But
no one has the right to say that she's not a musician.

'nuff said?

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
From: djjames@cup.portal.com (Daniel J James)
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
Subject: Re: "The Making of Sgt. Pepper"
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 17:13:12 PDT
Organization: The Portal System (TM)

  I made a copy of `The Making of Sgt Pepper'.  I'd be willing to make a copy
for you.  If you haven't received about 100 offers by now, let me know.

djj

=============================
   djjames@cup.portal.com
djjames@djamiga.raidernet.com
=============================
Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: brennan@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan)
Subject: Re: "The Making of Sgt. Pepper" on Disney
Reply-To: brennan@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu (Joseph Brennan)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 18:50:13 GMT

In article <7003@transfer.stratus.com> bad@pismo.sw.stratus.com (Bruce
Dumes) writes:

>Someone inside made themselves a copy, and it seems like much of this stuff
>probably leaked during the preparations for the Abbey Road show in '83.

Certainly, there were suddenly a "new" set of EMI outtakes on the
bootleg market right after that.  The compilation of the "Sessions" LP
a couple of years after seemed to result in more "new" material.  It
seemed obvious that tapes had been copied while out of the vault.  I'd
like to pass along a remark I read somewhere, that the tapes had been
circulating for years before, and the timing of wider distribution was
done as a smokescreen.  Whether you believe that, or believe that that
very statement is the smokescreen, is a tough choice.  Who knows?

--Joe Brennan

Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles
From: Christer.Gullstrand@malmo.trab.se (Christer Gullstrand)
Subject: Re: Wings ' boots
Keywords: Wings' boots
Organization: Telia Research, Malmo, Sweden
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 09:39:46 GMT

In article <1992Sep27.212758.4754@pellns.alleg.edu> takamay@pell3l0.alleg.edu (Yui Takamatsu) writes:
>Are there any boots of early Wings touring the colleges? I've never seen  
>boots of the college tour.  Also, are there any boots of the 1979 tour?  
>Are there Kampuchea boots? I'd love to hear the live version of  
>"Rockestra's theme".  Is the sound quality good on these boots?  Usually  
>these old live boots are audience taped and they SUCK.  
>Thank you very much. 

I have one boot of the 1979 tour (taped in Liverpool).
It's a double called Wings live in Japan 1980, or something like that.
Fair sound quality.

I haven't seen any "College boots", but I have one from Montreux later
that same year (1972). A double of average quality, but great performance!

I also have one from Liverpool 1973, excellent quality AND performance!!!

Christer (Christer.Gullstrand@malmo.trab.se)

Newsgroups: rec.music.beatles