Page 2 of 2
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 8:28 am
by Jim of Seattle
Thornberry wrote:I thought the including of Help!, Revolution, and back in the USSR, where pointless to the record. They sounded better quality-wise, but nothing different at all.
Yeah, they sounded WAY better! I'm really glad they kept some songs as-is and just improved the sound quality. It felt like I was hearing them for the first time again. I adore those 3 tracks. I wish they would go back and re-release all the original albums again unchanged but just remastered.
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 9:08 am
by fluffy
Rumor has it that they're doing that for the digital download services.
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:11 pm
by Thornberry
Jim of Seattle wrote:I wish they would go back and re-release all the original albums again unchanged but just remastered.
I oh man I agree with them rereleasing them. I guess I didnt like the songs in the context of the album. I didnt feel that was what the album was about. I just felt like they slapped in there cause they are great songs, but using that logic, you would have to slap about 150 more songs in
Alot of my early beatles recordings got stolen about a year back, and I havent bought them again because I do hear they are remastering them, and thats when imma bounce!!!!
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 1:44 pm
by Jim of Seattle
You know I read once that the reason the bass is so low in the mix in the early Beatle albums is that they didn't want the big bass sound to make peoples' record needles skip!
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:59 pm
by Thornberry
Jim of Seattle wrote:You know I read once that the reason the bass is so low in the mix in the early Beatle albums is that they didn't want the big bass sound to make peoples' record needles skip!
Its too bad really because I truly think Paul was among the great bass players of all time. He was just so damn creative! My biggest influence in bass for sure ( I actually even have a violin like bass, just not a Hoffner
)