The Capitol versions: con Home page | Beatle News Briefs | Beatle TV Alert| The Beatles - today | The Beatles - yesterday | Beatle archives | Beatles discographies | Links, pictures and other things | Beach Boys | Byrds |All sorts of stuff | What's New and Improved
In Association with Amazon.com


The Capitol versions: con

"Capitol Versions: Against" feedback form

Your full name:
Your email address: (e.g.: you@aol.com)

Indicate why you don't want the Capitol LPs released on CD:

.    
FREE feedback form powered by FreeForm
 
FreeForm



(Some of these responses have been edited.)

Added Nov. 27, 2004

Michael John Angliss: I am a second-generation fan who didn't start buying Beatles' records until 1976, when the "1962-1970 Singles Collection" was released in the UK. My introduction to the albums was via the British vinyl editions that at the time appeared to be available only in stereo in the large record shops, such as HMV. When the compact discs were initially released, I was also rather disappointed that the mono versions of the first four albums had been issued, rather than the stereo versions I was familiar with. Despite what George Martin feels about the first two in particular, I liked the stereo versions of these albums with their prototype stereo mixes. The same goes for "A Hard Day's Night" and "Beatles For Sale" which were both recorded on four-track tape and should have been released in stereo on cd. The fact that isolated tracks from these albums have since been released in stereo, on various compilations, indicates to me that someone knows they had made a mistake in issuing the mono versions of these songs.

The compact disc versions have been rarely played as they are virtually unlistenable and can induce earache without too much effort. The sound is hard, strident and muddy. The packaging is similarly shoddy, looking like a cut and paste hack job. The later compact discs in stereo fare a bit better, although I know some fans have objected to the remixing done on some of them. However, having heard the "Yellow Submarine Songtrack" and compared it to the existing "Yellow Submarine" compact disc, it becomes apparent how bad the original compact discs now sound.

If Capitol/EMI/Apple wants to release the US albums for those fans in the States then I don't have a problem with it. I am highly unlikely to buy them, as they are as unfamiliar to me as the UK versions are Stateside. However, as others have mentioned previously, it is annoying that the original UK back catalogue has still not been remastered or remixed while other projects that I would term as non-essential i.e. "Let It Be Naked" (dreadful title, perhaps they should have asked Ringo for one) and "Beatles 1's" (without "Please Please Me" and "Strawberry Fields Forever" and another uninspired title) are released.

Now that the US versions have started to be released with stereo and mono versions on each disc, I would hope that when the UK catalogue is finally remastered in 2031, when I am 70, that the mono and stereo versions are included in the same manner. The argument about problems with royalties for stereo and mono versions on one disc obviously having been overcome I assume with the release of these US discs. I would also like to see in 2040 the complete Hollywood Bowl concerts from 1964 and 1965 released in stereo, rather than the edited album issued in 1977. In 2050, it would be interesting if the Anthology compact discs are recompiled to include those tracks that were omitted the first time around that everyone knows exists and to junk the spoken word commentaries on disc 1.

One other note of interest, the latest edition of "Record Collector" in the UK states that there is a bootleg 2 DVD set available called "Chronicles" which reportedly contains all the promotional films in excellent quality. It also reports that a complete version of the Shea Stadium Concert has also leaked out. Forgive me for being cynical but I wonder whether these items have "leaked out" in the manner that information is "leaked out" before politicians officially announce it. If the reaction is bad they can quickly amend their policy before it becomes official. In other words, are Apple et al testing the water to see if there is any demand for these items prior to an official release, as if they didn't know! Anyway, when these items are officially released in 2061, when I am 100, I will download these from the super hyper broadband Internet device I am sure we all will own. Marc Uhl: The problem is, we are waiting too long for remasters of Beatles albums. Why EMI/Apple did not gave us remasters (remixes) of these albums? I don't think they will release remasters in the near future. Capitol made us now wait longer because of commercial reasons. Capitol can't sell their box sets when EMI comes with new remastered CD's. The sound on the Anthology DVD's is so wonderful! The US albums are too short and the added reverb is horrible. However, I like the mono versions of "And I Love Her" and "If I Fell".

John McCreary: It's well known the fabs didn't want their music altered or tampered with. I would be very surprised if legal action isn't taken against Capitol. Dave Dexter & Capitol have too much time on their hands & are just out to make more money off the greatest band in history. Dexter makes me sick. He once said The Beatles were rather hopeless & also indicated George Martin didn't know how to produce. Who is trusting this guys judgement & what kind of authority does he have to tamper with the greatest songs of all time? Who at Apple is responsible for this? The "duophonic" or "fake stereo" recordings released by Capitol in the 60's were NEVER auhorized by George Martin or The Beatles - it was some empty suit at Capitol records who thought his versions with echo sounded better than the original recordings. Thats a fact. I'M REAL DISSAPOINTED WITH APPLE CORPS.

Tom Passamonte: I don't want the capital lps released because I"M NOT PLAYING ON THEM.

Added Nov. 24, 2004

Peter Neski: The Beatles Lps are so short you could fit both the Mono and The Stereo versions of the British albums along with each single on single remastered super audio cds. But what's with this high priced cheap poorly designed cardboard box,Where they can't even design a box set They don't even know how to do the cardboard sleeves They made them the wrong size!!!! While I didn't expect too much from Capitol, who would guess they do such a crappy job.The Japanese have been making wonderful Lp Style sleeves for years. One only has to look at japanese cardboard sleeve versions of the Hollies cds(many with bonus tracks). They have one Hollies album which is the same design as the Beatles for sale Lp, What a let down,I hope the sound Q makes up for this mess.

Brian Pogson: Well I guess it is a little too late. "IT" is out and you know I went and bought it just to see. Well it was a waste of money. First, all the hype about the including both mono and stereo. Did everyone not realize any Beatle fan already has the Mono version. Thanks Capital for giving us something we already had. Second, why didn't they put 2 albums on 1 disc. Again, thanks for the ripoff. The cardboard packaging, well very cheap and it will fall apart in no time. If it was so important to release all the Capitol Beatle albums of 1964, what happened to "The Beatles Story" or are you waiting for another chance to suck Beatle Fans dry. This set of songs should have been put out as rareties set. The sound of the recordings is nice and are an oddity for collectors. Capitol, you should be ashamed of yourself for your money grubbing attitude. I am also worried about "Apple Records" you agreed to this. What happened to you ! Beatle Fans made you. As a Beatle Fan I would love to offer my sevices in the future. Capitol ask a fan on how something is to be presented. Show some respect for the people that made your company what it is today. Capitol, I have always supported you, but now and in the future, I am not so sure. So......for all those people thinking of buying this Box Set : PLEASE DON'T - SEND A MESSAGE TO CAPITOL. THANK YOU

Added Nov. 17, 2004

Joseph Self: By now, it's a moot point whether these versions should be released--I had it in my hands today in Best Buy. I looked at the price ($59.99), snickered, put it down and bought the new Aimee Mann live CD/DVD and the old Elvis Costello IMPERIAL BEDROOM reissue. Spent 30 bucks, got two discs that I'll actually play more than once, and still have 30 bucks left. I left feeling a winner. I hope others will do the same during the first week so as not to encourage any more of releases of this ilk.

Wayne Sandifer: Yeah but that's the way we heard those 4 LP's and they harbor certain memories I guess!. I agree the Brit versions are better because they have more songs-less actual product to buy! Paul Gonzalez: Because I want a newly remix Release of all the british album for the dvd audio format.

Added Nov. 16, 2004

Richard Sinclair: I do understand why Americans who were there at the time want to be able to buy digital versions of the albums they grew up with but the bottom line is (or should be, anyway) this: the Capitol albums are NOT the albums The Beatles intented. Full stop (sorry, 'period'). In that way they are no better than some cheesy 'Now That's What I Call The Beatles Vol. 23' compilation. Releasing the Capitol albums opens a real can of worms. I mean, if I were a South American and EMI Brazil, for example, had THEIR own version of a much-loved Beatles album, well I'd want that released now. And I'd be perfectly within my rights. Maybe the Capitol albums are the only other versions out there, I admit I don't know, but I'm fearful they're not...As this is the way things are going I guess as long as the ORIGINAL, AS-THE-BEATLES-INTENDED-THEM (i.e. British) albums are ALWAYS available, maybe remastered but certainly not remixed, I guess that will have to do. I am shocked and disappointed if EMI/Apple/Paul and Ringo, Yoko and Olivia have signed off on the new American set. It's a complete reversal of policy. Oh well, I guess nothing's sacred any more.

Added Nov. 12, 2004

Chris Kelly: You americans don't get it - you think the world revolves around you - these ain't real Beatles albums. These ain't what the Beatles compiled. These ain't what the Beatles wanted. These ain't what the Beatles KNEW. They were cheap attempts at cashing in on what Capitol saw as a fad. They are as cheesy as "Love Songs" or "Hey Jude" or "Rock 'N' Roll Music" or "Beatles Ballads" or "Reel Music" etc etc. If you want to buy them in this age of being able to compile your own CDs then more fool you. Do you think 24 bit mastering will improve the sound any more than what was released 17 years ago on compact disc, when the new sources are actually 60's copies of the tapes originally used, and also degenerated in some instances with sub standard effects? I think nostalgia is getting in the way of common sense here. I think the Beatles get it just about right when on the Hollywood Bowl recordings they try to describe a song to the american audience as being on the album before the albu! m before. The american sequences were anonymous to them, and hey, I agree.

John S. Damm: The phrase "Ugly American" was in response to certain American tourists who would travel to other countries(mostly Europe) and who could not hide their feelings that America was superior in every way to their host nation, particularly as to culture. A generation of "cultural elite" in this country and abroad bemoaned the "Ugly American" syndrome and pumped into us that we were in fact cheap knockoffs to European, African and Asian cultures. Well, these elite were right in this regard as to The Beatles' American catalog but now the "Ugly American" syndrome is alive and well with mostly elderly(or at least aging) U.S. Beatles' fans(many part of this same "cultural elite") who have complained all along that the U.S. versions of Beatles' albums are superior because that is how these over-indulged baby boomers first heard The Beatles. Please! Bruce Spizer primarily justifies this Volume I by pointing out that the majority of the tracks will appear on legitimate c.d.'s for the first time in stereo. A point well taken. However, as "Volume I" implies a "Volume II", etc., this "in stereo" argument will not hold up for the next round of American releases since The Beatles' c.d. catalog is in stereo from "Help!" on out. The American "Help!" l.p. album was a travesty with the incidental film music and alleged souvenir album jacket. But most appalling are the U.S. versions of the otherwise masterpieces, "Rubber Soul" and "Revolver." As to the former, the true scope of this "Ugly American" motivation becomes apparent by those whiny, Social Security-aged American Beatle fans who have never accepted the real "Rubber Soul" that changed the musical landscape in so many ways and lamely state that they must have "I've Just Seen A Face" on their RS album because that makes it more folksy! But most contemptible is the American treatment of the majestic "Revolver" gutted of three John Lennon treasures either because of Jesus or Capitol's insatiable butchering to give us the sordid "Yesterday And Today." Yes, only Satan and Paul McCartney could condone releasing in 2005 the Lennon-Lite version of "Revolver." Where does this U.S. imperialism stop? Does the world really need "The Beatles Again"(or "Hey Jude" or whatever the damn thing was called) because that is what our pampered forefathers and foremothers listened to back in the day? Nope, the Ugly Americans have reared their heads once again!

Mark Bellamy: The Capitol versions should not be released simply because the Beatles themselves did not intend them to be released in this manner. I grew up on the American versions but when I finally got a hold of a British release back in 1976, I was absolutely stunned at how much Capitol played with the music. Never mind how they were placed on the albums, it is the sound of the recordings I am referring to. Why did Capitol have Dave Dexter put echo on everything? Listen to the Capitol version of "I Feel Fine", as opposed to the British release and you'll see what I mean. I don't necessarily think that this is a rip-off because people will buy it. My guess is that Capitol will eventually release these as individual albums anyway. Anybody else agree? Besides, there are other recordings that should be released, such as the X-MAS fan club recordings or Hollywood Bowl concert, as well as the mono versions of "Sgt. Pepper" and "White Album". Since Capitol is re-releasing these, they should ! FINALLY put out the butcher cover on "Yesterday and Today", which I assume will be in Vol.II?

Eric Robinette: It's not so much that I DON'T want the Capitol LPs on CD...it's that I think this release is, in the end, superfluous. I'm what I guess you would call a second generation fan. I was born in 1970, so I heard the American albums first, but I've spent most of my Fab-loving life with the British ones, which I strongly prefer. That said, I understand the nostalgia for the Capitol discs, and if first generation (or other) fans want them, more power to them. But to me, this all seems like an excuse to separate me from my money, for what? A box set which consists entirely of tracks I already own. Hoo-ya. Yes, I know, you get new-to-CD sound mixes and running orders that some fans are still "used" to, but I'm sorry....that's just not worth $55 to me. If I wanted the American compilations that badly, the solution for me is real simple: CD burner. I wouldn't mind the idea so much IF the sound of the original 1987-88 CDs had been improved first. But releasing the American configurations is a poor, poor substitute for a very badly needed and long overdue remaster. It really galls me that the CD catalogue of the greatest band in the world consists mostly of second-rate masters or, in this case, misguided packages. Bottom line: Unless the CD project gives me compelling value , I won't give Capitol/Apple my money...or my funny paper.

Added Nov. 2, 2004

Brandi Clark: While I don't agree with what Capitol did to the Beatles' carefully-crafted and intricately arranged recordings, I do respect the fact that the US LPs were the way in which many fans came to know the Beatles. Having these versions in cd format as well could be invaluable to nostalgic fans in love with the arrangements they first treasured. Of course it might become problematic for new fans wishing to buy the "true" albums, and easily making a mistake when purchasing, but I suppose this could be remedied by clear packaging.

Tom Lane: It would be OK if people like George Martin, etc. and the remaining beatles were involved in the process. If capital is not going to go through the original master tapes and clean them up right, then I am afraid that the new cd's will not sound any where near as good as they should. I am a beatle fan and a poor job would be blasphemy.

Patrick Storedahl: I love the Beatles. But I think you freaks should give it up. It's like free speech, if you don't like it don't buy it. If Capitol can make a buck they're going to do it. I'd lay money that some of those who don't want Capitol to release this will even buy it themselves just to bitch about it. Sounds an aweful lot like burning Beatle records to me. I think you're all putting far to much time into something that really doesn't matter. In short, get a life. Added Oct. 30, 2004

Aaron Schab: The release of the Capitol LPs on CD cheapens the legacy of the Beatles. There is no need to magnify the mistakes Capitol made in the '60s by perpetuating them on CD - the catalog should reflect the Beatles' original intentions: PERIOD. I am amazed they have permitted this release to go forward - with so many other possible releases, why release this junk? The original Beatlemaniacs can fire up their record players (I still listen to the old LPs, too) but there is no reason to clutter history for the following generations by having 3 alternate versions of each Beatles album. This is a rip-off.

Michael Bleicher: I agree with the others who say that nostalgia is a poor excuse.at least it's only a boxset, so new fans won't end up buying these albums. I suppose in the long run it doesn't matter, and the music is great, anyway, but doesn't it just seem a bit...pointless? Rather money grubbing. I'd rather see the British CDs remastered (and remixed, in some cases, but that's ANOTHER debate). Anyway, I don't think I'm going to buy this box, but I may end up buying Volume II, because currently that'd be the only way to get mono "Rubber Soul" and "Revolver"s (you arrange the tracks from those albums and "Yesterday and Today"), unless EMI/Apple finally gets off their collective arse.

Added Oct. 29, 2004

Vince Hamen: The claim by certain people that they would prefer to hear the American versions out of nostalgia is a poor excuse. Would they say the same about a poorly edited version of, say, an early film that later is restored to its original lenght using a new 35 mm print?

Trevor Eivers: Firstly, cause its not the way the Beatles themselves meant them to be heard in the first place. Secondly because why pay for these CDs, when hopefully all the same tracks will be remastered and released on the original albums in the next few years? Added Oct. 26, 2004

Matt Hoiem: *All tracks are found elsewhere some form or another
*Would just leech more money from buyers
*The only reason to do it is for collector's sake
*The Beatles never had the American releases as part of their original concepts, merely as the overseas record arangers ideas.

John Paul Mitten: Because that's the way I heard them as I grew up as a teenager. The albums and the original Capital format is engrained in my head. One's mind automatically is preformatted to the original Capital lp's. E.G., We ALL know that WITH THE BEATLES -- something's wrong with it. We heard (here, in the U.S.A.) MEET THE BEATLES. We all expect that lp to start off with 'I Want To Hold Your Hand' . The mind automatically is preparing for, 'One, two, three, four' (into 'I Saw Her Standing There' We're Americans in the good ol' U.S.A. I'll admit, when I first saw the British versions, they were a neat item, BUT then the Capital versions slowly disappeared. Bring back all the Capitol versions. AMEN. John Mitten, Manchester, New Hampshire, U.S.A. (Christian Thinker, Inventor, & Musician)

Added Jan. 30, 2000

Justin (fiveo@bga.com): Because I think that the American songs sound better on LPs and I think that they would sound sucky on CDs. I think that the Beatles should be available on vinyl and tapes.

Ward Whipple (wardo68@aol.com): I still own a working turntable, so if I ever want to hear any of the albums and be transported back to when I first dropped the needle on side 1, I can do just that. If the CDs were being released by EMI for the first time ever in 2000, a case could be made for having the mono and stereo versions back to back on the same disc. But I would still use the "British" sequences, becuase that was how they were originally intended. ... If you want to hear Beatles VI, play your record, or make a custom recording onto tape or CD. They don't owe us a damn thing.

RaphaŽl Vandenberghe (Rafvdberghe@hotmail.com): I'm against it, because, the British versions were those "made by" the Beatles, as they wanted it, and mixed like they heard it !

Martin John Kyprianides (martin_kyprianides@usa.net): I am a UK Beatles fan of 30. Started listening to Beatles LPs at age of 10. My view is that absolutely no way on earth should Capitol Records in the U.S. be allowed to rip off Beatles fans all over again with their butchered albums. Thank God Capitol were prevented from doing this in 1987 when the Beatles back catalogue was transferred to CD. If they MUST do it (and I'd be surprised if the remaining Beatles let them) then perhaps the Capitol U.S. LP's could be issued as a "limited edition" on good quality 180gm vinyl replicating the original U.S. releases between 1964 and 1966 (after Revolver, American and British LPs were issued in identical fashion - thank God!). BUT my plea to EMI is keep these LPs off CD, PLEASE. Sure enough, I can understand that a lot of older American Beatles fans are fond of LPs such as Meet The Beatles and Beatles '65, it's easy to understand because these are the records they grew up with. But would I be prepared to buy Rubber Soul and Revolver re-released on CD to reflect the original U.S. vinyl releases with songs in the wrong order and some songs actually missing? I don't think so. Let's forget transferring those awful-sounding early Capitol LPs to CD, instead let's start campaigning EMI in the UK (they make all the decisions, remember) for a new set of 24-bit digitally re-mastered CDs based on the UK releases. This should include the Past Masters Vol 1 & 2 for non-album tracks, the Red/Blue compilations and a full-length uncut Live At The Hollywood Bowl. Forget Love Songs, Reel Music, Ballads, 20 Greatest Hits and all the other shoddy late 70s/early 80s compilations - they were a rip-off. Instead let's also see MONO versions of Sgt Pepper (a special Millennium edition perhaps? after all it is THE album of the Millennium in just about every poll) & The White Album as well as the first 4 LPs in Stereo.

Mike Tandrow (MTandrow@aol.com): The Capitol albums do not need to be released on CD -- what they did to the original British releases is unforgivable. They were motivated by greed, period. Why validate this disgusting, artless practice?

Caesar Isaac (caesar775): It is absurd. Everyone knows Capitol simply released Beatle records in such a form to basically make more money off the Beatles. We have all the British records already, why not just be content with the sequences that the band intended in the first place? But of course, being a Beatles fan, chances are i would buy the American issues if they did came to light, anyways....

Noel Stock (nlstock@iexpress.net.au): If the original U.S. 11 track versions are released, they should carry a disclaimer explaining that they are for collectors only and are NOT the original UK versions so that curious young fan know which is which. They could also contain liner note explaining their history-the U.S. company reasons (profit) for not releasing the original versions by the Beatles. I understand nostalgia, but let the true history of these albums be on them too.

Mitch Stewart (stewartmitch@hotmail.com): EMI is long overdue for a Beatles reissue campaign. Some of the material on the Anthology (eg: Kansas City, being a typical example) are better sound-wise than the CD's made in 1987. Digital mastering techniques have come a long way in 5 YEARS let alone 12! So, the idea of releasing the U.S. versions should NEVER be a priority. Even the CD sleeves should be brought up to date. I would even agree to the first two CD's being rereleased in mono (as definitely intended) but the stereo mixes for "A Hard Day's Night" and "Beatles For Sale" were quite good. Check out the red and blue albums. You'll get my drift. It will happen, I believe. The new "Yellow Submarine" soundtrack could only be the tip of the iceberg.

Fred Young (f.young@tvdsb.on.ca): 1) The mixes were awful (too much echo). 2) Most of the albums were only about half an hour long. 3) The Fabs themselves did not approve these compilations. 4) It would just be another way to relieve collectors of their hard earned cash.

D.R.Pettit (pettit4842@home.com): I hope someone from Capitol reads this page. I'd like to address my comments to you. Judging by the reactions of all these Beatle fans, you must be able to see what a bad idea it would be to release the American versions on CD. These people are not just Beatle fans, but Beatle fans with money to spend. And as far as I know, Capital is still in business to make a profit. So why not scrap this idea, and consider some of the ideas repeatedly presented here instead? First, release the first four LP's (plus From Me To You,Ask Me Why,etc.) in stereo. (Yes, stereo was primative back then, but they do sound great!); second, release "Live At The Hollywood Bowl" on CD. This is the only known Hi-Fi Stereo recording of the Beatles in concert. (The energy created by the Beatles & their fans on this record gives me the chills everytime); third, hw about releasing a video of Beatle performances? This could include (unaltered of course) promo films, TV performances, musical scenes from their movies, etc. (Just once, I'd like to see an old clip without some narrator yapping through the guitar solo!) These are just a few of the suggestions presented on this page,all superior to the Capitol version idea. Give the people what they want, and maybe they'll give you their money.

Dale Clark (dclark2171@aol.com): I am against the Capitol re-releases on CD. They were a poor example (mst of the U.S. didn't know any better until CD's came out) of typical American marketing. Less music...same amount of money. I challengeeveryone here to go look at a major CD store (Best Buy..etc.) and thumb through the ELVIS CD catalog. RCA has re-issued over and over again. It is really sad. I do, however, would like to see the COMPLETE hollywood bowl concerts. I also know there is a Bootleg CD Stereo version (of fine quality) of YESTERDAY and TODAY album with the butcher cover. From what I hear..the attention to detail is tremendous. Front cover is cropped exactly, booklet explaining the "Butcher cover" history, Back artwork is also consistant. Even has Black capitol label with multi colored band around perameter. I could even see that as a legit release. The LP does carry some history. Also......EMI does need to release stereo versions of the first 4 LP's as well as a mono "Sgt. Pepper."p> John V. Gergesha (jvgergs@idirect.com): Quite frankly, after allready owing the original LP issues, I purchased the entire Beatle catalogue on CD and really have no desire to purchase any Capitol LPs on CD all over again. I found it rather refreshing, and enlightening to hear the original releases the way the Beatles intended them to be heard. I would love to see more Anthology-type releases. I own many bootleg LPs, covering everything from the 1966 Budokhan Hall concert to the Let It Be sessions and would like to see THOSE on CD down the road. Gerg Hanlin (greghanlin@yahoo.com): When I first heard a English pressing on the Parlaphone label of I FEEL FINE I was astounded at how clean it sounded. Especially during the opening feedback. All U.S. pressings of this song had an unbelieveable anount of static during the song and it was especially noticeable during the feedback part. Maybe there are some people out there who wouldn't mind all that unnecessary backround noise, but I sure would. I guess it all comes down to a matter of choice. And I would certainly choose not to buy CD versions of the American releases. The only way I would buy the American releases would be if the CDs featuring songs from the first 4 U.K. CDs' were to be released in stereo.

Alan Brodie (AlBrodie@AOL.com): I cannot think of a single good reason to release the American albums on CD. And here's another reason. It's been thirty five plus years since those albums came out. There is a whole legion of young Beatles fans today who weren't born until the 1970's. Why confuse these new fans by cluttering the CD bins with duplicate and inferior copies of the same songs. Make it simple. Keep everything the way the Beatles inteded. Though I will give creedence to the argument that the first four albums should be reissued in stereo.

Michael Perkins (Perkins96@Sprynet.com): The original British releases were as The Beatles intended them to be. I see no need to release the Capitol versions, unless possibly as collector's limited editions. The "Something New", "Beatles VI", and especially "Hey Jude" album jackets were pretty cool! Added June 1, 1999

Joseph Bongiorno (JLBong9359@aol.com): The US format should not be released for the same reason Ted Turner should never have colorized Black and White movies........It's not how thw artist intended it to be seen, heard or enjoyed.

Added May 1, 1999

Phil Mulliner (Mulliner22@aol.com): I purchased a CD recorder and made my own using both the UK CDs and clean vinyl LPs as the source. I photocopied the original art work reducing it to CD size. The CDs I have made look and sound great. I also have made the compilations "Love Songs," "Rock 'n' Rol Music," "Reel Music," etc., therefore, I have no use for official versions, which I don't think Apple will release anyway. This was a very enjoyable project for me. I also made stereo versions of the first four mono CDs. Try it...it's as easy as recording cassettes!

Gilbert Neal (heresmydemo@mindspring.com): Aside from the thrill of being able once again to play hockey-stick guitar to "Beatles Second Album" as I originally did back in 1973, I think we should defer to the Beatles original wishes.

Steven Sidoti (Sidotis@scowen.com): Who cares about the American Versions on CD, the important thing is to get the first four LP's (CD's) available in STEREO!!! wouldn't you say????

Added April 25, 1999

Ross Morrison (rainman@access1.net): No purpose, what needs to be done is the catalog be remastered, true stereo versions are available on "A Hard Day's Night," and "Beatles for Sale." Issuing any CD with only 11 songs, which amounts to about 25 minutes would be a joke. Plus the sound quality of the American/Capitol issues are horrible.

Mike Wilcox (conwilco@ix.netcom.com): I feel fans have had enough of inferior product and the multiple issue of titles, that have no significant difference (in sound and packaging). Capitol, EMI and Apple have misrepresented or outright lied to the buying public about every Beatle release. Initially, they released sound versions of songs, they said didn't exist. Now they release product, like "the White Album", representing that product, by way of omission, with fans presuming it was remastered. It seems that that the individuals who are making these decisions are trying to put one over on customers. You would think, Colonel Parker was running the show!!!! If the group prinipals and the record companies really want to redeem themselves...if they really care about the fans and buying public...they would come up with a mechanism to turn in that useless, inferior product, and "give some" to the fans, who have believed their carny sales tactics, and put up just enough, with their elite, and arrogant sales pitch.

Raul Quiroga (quiroga@math.cinvestav.mx): The Beatles themselves did not intend the albums to be the way Capitol issued them in the USA.

Added May 25, 1998

Brian O'Rourke (xmute@pathcom.com): Ideally I'd like them all to be re-mastered by the Beatles and include all songs from an album's sessions. I don't mean outakes, but it would be nice to include the singles that were recorded at the time. Failing this ideal solution, I'd prefer to hear the recordings as George Martin and the Beatles intended, not as Capitol did. Although a release of the mono mixes might be interesting, a close listening to your original North American mixes should reveal different mixes than on the CD releases. My version of "Slow Down" has a slightly different guitar solo, on my version of "Rain" (the original single, mono release, not the stereo version found on later compilations)the tamborine is back in the mix, not sticking out like a sore thumb. Some differences are regional! l, for example I have Canadian versions, which I believe didn't include the extra reverb that tunes like "Misery" received in the U.S.A. Another example is the dramatically different mix on the UK mono release of the White Album, different solos, endings and keys are in this release. A lot of possible releases, but it might be easier just to stick with the UK releases. We can't hold on to every moment of the past. Some things have to be lost to history.

Randall Waverly Tatum (Ringo@Visi.Net): The Capitol LPs are not worth the time and effort to be put on CD, since the British versions,as perfected by John, Paul, George and Ringo, are far superior,and issued as originally intended.The whole point of this is,how do you really want it,as an untouched finished masterpiece by the artists themselves,or as a hap-hazard, last-minute effort by recording company executives who cared more how to milk extra money from The Beatles cash cow than they did about the artists original masterpiece!! The original British versions have been such a relief to this Beatles fan. How nice it is to actually have 14 songs on one CD, ya know. I dont feel so ripped off anymore!! Sure,you can keep your old American versions,but as for me, I'm throwing out the Capitol Crap and I'm headed straight for EMI/PARLOPHONE, AS ORIGINALLY INTENDED!!!!!! Capitol always ripped us fans off, BUT THE BEATLES NEVER DID!!

Johnny Savage (jsaulovich@berksys.com): These albums were configured without any consideration of artistic merit. They were created strictly for profit. To allow Capitol to profit once again would be shameless. If they are to be for sale, it should be by mail-order only.

Ravi Kiran (Dragon32@bruce-lee.com): If the U.S. mixes are released on CD to please U.S. fans, why not Japanese, Australian, German, French, Brazilian, Taiwanese, Canadian, Italian, etc. mixes? Do we really need to please the U.S. fans in this manner? Look at all the Elvis best of CDs on the market! If we release the U.S. albums on CD, then we will be oversaturated with products! What I want are remixed and remastered versions of the UK albums, all of them released in remixed stereo. I also want "Sgt. Pepper" and the White Album in mono, too. If we release the U.S. mixes, why not every mix of every song under the sun?!? I am against the idea of releasing WHOLE U.S. albums, but maybe we could have the false start of "I'm Looking Through You" as a bonus track on the UK "Rubber Soul." And the "Help!" and "A Hard Day's Night" instrumentals could be bonus tracks on the UK "Help!" and "A Hard Day's Night."

Roger Drolet (rdrolet@videotron.ca): The Beatles decided to release their albums as the original british versions. The American fans can find ALL the material on the different CDs now on sale in the U.S. market.The Capitol's vinyl LP's are part of history, but Apple doesn't have to make this move ONLY because the American fans (or industry) want it. The United States isn't the center of the world !!!

Trevor Hilton (corpimag@corporateimage.com.au): This "does my head in". All you Seppos who want the patently inferior U.S. compilations need only get your own CD-R writers and bloody well do it yourselves. The U.S. releases were NOT, EVER EVER intended by the artists or their producer to be sequenced in that order. And 11 tracks instead of 14 per album was purely and solely a way of maximizing publishing androyalties for Capitol. This is typical of the Seppo-centrism that the rest of the world has to constantly endure. In late 1984, the UK aid-for-Africa pop-group ensemble sang "Feed The World". Then the Seppos followed up with "We ARE The World". And I think that says it all. Americans are a damned race anyway. Good riddance to 'em. Liz Martin (dizymisslizzy@hotmial.com): No because they weren't highly repected after people found out what happend. I don't think it would be good also because every thing has been released already.

Bruce Burgess (bwburgess@yahoo.com): The British releases are far superior in terms of content, sound quality and cover design and they are the albums the Beatles wanted released. I would far sooner see Apple and EMI spend their time remastering all of the UK releases in stereo and releasing their 1965 to 1968 releases in mono. "Hollywood Bowl" on CD and any previously unreleased material should also be given priority. Also, by not releasing the "butchers" on CD, the value of these albums will increase, as they become increasingly more difficult to find.

Kevin J. Langan (Lowbasso@aol.com): Regardless of how Beatle albums were released in the US in the 60's, The Beatles themselves decreed how their music should have been presented through the EMI recordings. We, as Beatle fans, should preserve their wishes and ensure that all future Beatlefans will hear the music for the first time in the proper order The Beatles intended it to be heard. Only fans who were alive in the 60's will have had to suffer through Capitol's cheap "Make-a-fast-buck" compilations. Remember, there are many Beatle fans around today and will be even more in future generations who will know only the EMI CD releases which are properly done. If we "original 60's Beatle fans" need to hear the Capitol versions, we can pull out our old records. I for one have not listened to a single Capitol version since the EMI CD versions came out and probably never will again. And I am an original Beatle fan from the 60's.

Michael McGrath (mcgper@msn.com): When I was 13 or 14, I had started to collect the Beatle albums then available on vinyl...living in Puerto Rico meant that all I could get were the American versions. As a real fan, I had always wished to have had the British versions which not only had more songs but were tracked in the order the Beatles wished, With the American versions, I felt discouraged in trying to complete my collection, because even if you did collect all the American albums there would still be holes in your collection even with the Rarities album. When the CD's came out, I was happy that at last everyone around the world could have the albums the way they were meant to be and with the Past Masters your collection would be complete! Good riddance to those choppy Capitol versions. Instead of asking for those in digital format, shouldn't we be asking for remastering & repackaging of the British catalogue complete with liner notes by Lewhison and the first four in stereo! That to me seems more important! And with the remastering I believe that the "Past Masters" tracks should all be spread as bonus tracks on the CD's according to the period in which they were released. This to me, along with "Christmas Album" & the alternate "Let It Be" should be what fans should demand!

Added May 3, 1998

Nik Everett (NikEverett@aol.com): My feeling is split because it might be cool to have the singles released as the American mixes...but how 'bout this for a discussion? I would like the first few albums going up to "Help!" to at least have stereo mixes. I have a Japanese vinyl version of "A Hard Day's Night" in stereo that's incredible. I don't like the mono CD version.

Kevin Hendryx (KevinHendryx"@mail.utexas.edu): I second the "thumbs down" vote for all the good reasons stated by my fellow critics, and most importantly, because that's what Paul, George and Ringo want (John too, no doubt). Who would deny their wishes in favor of EMI/Capitol's? Would we also prefer "corporate" versions of films or books? Or should we respect the wishes of the creator? Let's forget the inferior U.S. albums and concentrate on lobbying for worthwhile NEW releases: the complete "Hollywood Bowl" or other live concerts; the Christmas Fan Club album; the original "Get Back" album; stereo "A Hard Day's Night" and "Beatles For Sale" CDs; mono "Sgt Pepper" and the White Album; a couple of good, complete, undoctored promo films videotapes; or how about these album ideas: an expanded Yellow Submarine ST that includes ALL the songs presented in the film as well as the long version of "It's All Too Much" and the Martin orchestral music (because the album as it now stands is the weakest in the Beatles catalog, and something should be done about it); or a "restored" edition of Sgt. Pepper that uses the original running order of Side 1 and includes ALL the songs recorded during the "Pepper" sessions, e.g. SFF, "Penny Lane," "It's Only A Northern Song," etc. And not forgetting the group "OM" at the end of "A Day In the Life"!

Simon White (simon@atomicnet.com.au): Capitol ripped off the U.S. public once... don't let them do it again.

Added Jan. 28, 1998

††Dragon32 (Dragon32@bruce-lee.com):If the Capitol mixes (or should I say butcherings) of the Beatles are released on CD, then other countries will put out their own mixes and clutter up the market with some more useless stuff. Now, if some alternate Parlophone mixes were released, fine, but don't release those accursed Capitol mixes. I like the fact that there isn't a lot of useless stuff on the market. What is so special about the Capitol mixes? I can add annoying echo to the tracks on my computer! Here is what I would like to see released: Un-Spectorized "Let it Be" album; "Hollywood Bowl" CD; The whole UK catalog remastered with extensive liner notes and foldout LP sized reprints of the UK LP covers; extended "Making of Pepper" video; making of "Abbey Road" (album) video. That's it. Don't want to clutter up the market with bastardized remixes from C*pitol.

†† Damon Jones(damon.e.jones@vanderbilt.edu): The U.S. releases were a travesty to begin with.† Consider it a mistake that has been fixed.† We've got the songs in the way they were meant to be, it would seem redundant to seek their release in a less efficient, less meaningful form.† Instead, let's seek out other new Beatles releases, such as the original "Get Back" album or "Hollywood Bowl" on CD. P.S.:† I guess I'd be in favor of releasing the American versions of the albums if it would really make a substantial amount of people happy and/or much of the profits from sales went to charity.

ralph46@email.msn.com: I agree that we grew up listening to the Beatle releases with a great deal of echo.† In fact, I spent a good part of the '70s trying to obtain the true stereo releases.† I then discovered that the mono version of the tracks were, in fact the ones the Fab Four "approved" prior to release. George Martin and Geoff Emerick re-mixed the tracks for stereo.† So if you're a purist, you should clamor for the mono releases. An interesting note is that most (if not all) of the tracks on the first four British CDs were the mixed-down stereo versions...not the true mono version.

Added Jan. 18, 1998

Brian Flota (flotab01@student.ucr.edu): I'm a big Beatles fan and I feel that the U.K. versions of the Beatles albums are superior. Having said this, I must remind you that the Beatles records I listen to (I'm only 22 years old) are different from the ones my dad grew up listening to.† My Beatles listening experience is quite different from my dad's (he also experienced Beatlemania).† The mixes are poor on the U.S. albums, but this is what the kids back in the sixties had to listen to. Re-releasing the U.S. albums on CD would be cool, but, that would cost piles of extra money.† If they decide to rerelease these, they should also reissue some of the comp records like "Rock N' Roll Music" and "20 Greatest Hits," which kick ass.

Ines Sanchez (kxb26@rabbit.INS.CWRU.Edu): I think 90% of the debate over who wants to hear the Bealtes LPs and in which fashion is relatively silly when you consider what we're talking about: CDs!!!† If you want to hear "Revolver" the way the Beatles intended, pop in the CD and hit play.† If you want to be transported back to the Capitol version, just program the tracks in the order you want!† Anyone old enough to want that has to have a copy of the U.S. track listing somewhere (on an LP or cassette, on the net, or whatever.)† As for the "step-child" albums ("Something New," "Yesterday & Today," etc.) these can usually be made by combining tracks from one or two albums (at most), so one can just make a cassette.† The other side of this involves the lame instrumental soundtrack music from "Help!" and "A Hard Day's Night," and I doubt anyone misses that.† Finally, regarding alternate mixes, I think fans should accept the EMI mixes out of respect to Sir George, Sir Paul, John, George, & Ringo.† Those mixes are undisputedly what they wantd us to hear.† All the EQ and reverb applied by Capitol was an abomination, and was often used to overcome the limitations of LP format. All Beatles CDs should be identical from country to country, so future fans can hear the same music the same way. Instead of arguing over releasing the U.S. versions, we should be putting pressure on Capitol to update the CD catalog.† Every major "classic" performer (the Stones, the Beach Boys, Hendrix, Led Zeppelin, the Byrds, Stevie Wonder, Simon & Grafunkel, the Who, Elvis, Steely Dan, Clapton) has had their CDs updated at least once.† EMI needs to recreate ALL the original artwork, and could even augment what they have with rare photos, etc.† It would also be nice to have some mono mixes (like Sgt. Pepper & the white Album) available with the stereo versions.† Finally, Captiol should re-release "Live At the Hollywood Bowl" with the few tracks on "Rarities" that are still rare.† These are more important issues that should be addressed before the question of the U.S. LPs.

Naguib Tahan (ntahan@saonet.ucla.eduU: When I was younger (about the time of junior high) I really got into the Beatles.† My mom started it off giving me the "Twist and Shout" EP and Parlophone single "Hello Goodbye"/"I Am The Walrus."† By this time, though, we had moved to the U.S. and I only had access to U.S. album configurations. (I actually didn't know about the differences).† With the release of "Live at the BBC," I was once again pulled into the Beatles - and now a lot older (36) and hopefully wiser, (and with an adult-size pocket book, instead of my precious weekly allowance), I sought out any possible configuration, remix, remaster, etc.† I guess you could say I became a completist.† Having said that (and heard all the variations I could lay my hands on), I must say that the U.K. configurations are the truest as they represent JPG &R's original intent.† There are exceptions of course:† The US MMT configuration has stood the test of time; but there again, the German true stereo mix is far more aurally and physically satisfying.† This could last forever, then, if you see what I mean.† My true wish is for the release of all U.K. stereo mixes not currently available, i.e.., "The First Four", all the mono mixes not available: "Help" through "Yellow Submarine," and perhaps a third† (and fourth ?) "Past Masters" volume(s) to cover the oddities from around the world.† These could wrap up the remaining mixes, oddities, etc., both stereo and mono. The accompanying booklets to these volumes could provide alternative album, single, EP artwork from around the world, and inform the listener how the CD could be ordered to match the original release.

Added Jan. 11, 1998

Simon White (simon@atomicnet.com.au): Capitol ripped off the US public once... don't let them do it again. No Capitol-butchered versions.

Added Nov. 15, 1997

Joanne Lund (jsonjal@worldnet.att.net): I'm not sure how I feel about the idea of reissuing the US versions of the Beatles original European releases. On one hand I believe that if it is merely a matter of nostalgia for these configurations, then why not? On the other hand, as an American consumer, my initial exposure to the Beatles was through these cobbled together American releases("Beatles VI"; "The Beatles Again"). Mid-period American releases such as "Revolver" had omitted tracks that were included on the European releases. Why? Possibly so that Capitol could eventually put them out on some subsequent compilation? New fans wanting to build their collections might purcahase the US versions unknowingly. I feel that Beatles records should be enjoyed as the artists had intended, so I'll stick with my European versions, thank you very much.

Added Aug. 30, 1997

Pskay3@aol.com: No. I think the foreign ones are cooler and better looking covers and stuff. I'm 14 and I just got into them and I like the other versions a lot and I only kind of know about those versions. Not those American versions.

Added March 29, 1997

EFI3@aol.com: The only reason Capital started releasing Beatle records at all was when they had proof that they could make money by doing so. Capital boke up the albums in effort ro maximize profits. They included many instrumentals from the movies to fill albums and released the songs on others. Sometimes, in an effort to diferentiate their versions from the British counterparts, they screwed up . This is most notable on the Capitol version of "Help!" where the Beatles are positioned to spell HPEL. I wouldn't mind seeing the later albums from Pepper on released on Capitol. Frankly, I think that album is completed with "A Day in the Life" and the noise after that ruins the effect. As for the earlier versions, they belong to a safely locked away as a bad idea.

Raul (al588619@campus.cegs.itesm.mx): Don't do it. We have all the songs. It will be like just trying to get some more money.

Artur Hausner (artur@dtk.com.pl): I'm a long time the beatles fan. I love them. I know that John, Paul, George and Ringo hated the American albums. I don't like them either. Only the U.K. albums are true.

Added Feb. 18, 1997

Matt Loushin (MaadMatt@aol.com): Well, I don't want to tread on the same ground that's been tread on a few dozen times by now, but I agree with the Beatles themselves that the UK versions are all that there should be. And since I agree with sticking to the band's intentions, how about mono versions of "Help!" through the White Album (the only mixes of the albums that the band themselves were present for) and stereo mixes of "With the Beatles," "A Hard Day's Night" and "Beatles for Sale"? (Since "Please Please Me" was originally recorded on only a two-track, the stereo version of this has a LOT of separation). And while I'm on the soapbox, I'd like to mention my own personal pet peeve in the UK vs US album debate: the London/Decca Stones albums. Those of you with the UK versions of "Aftermath" or , "Between the Buttons" or "Out of Our Heads" know exactly what I'm talking about :)

Sean O'Neel (SeanJ160E@aol.com): As a longtime Beatles collector, my opinion is that although I cut my teeth on them, the Capitol versions of the Beatles LP's are generally an inferior product. Not only because of the reduced track lists, and greedy Capitol marketing ploy of releasing many, many more albums, but also because these albums are SONICALLY inferior. Capitol re-EQ'd the tapes, added extra reverb, extra compression, and ultimately extra noise. The only U.S. album I'd really like to see on CD would be "Live At The Hollywood Bowl" Simply because Parlophone didn't release it.

WRubie@aol.com: I found myself disapointed with not hearing the movie intro to HELP on the UK release and also the "one two three four" after "I Want to Hold your Hand." However I enjoy the freshness of the UK releases with respect to artist integrity.

Added Jan. 24, 1997

Jonathan Clarke, New York, NY (JackyRhode@aol.com): When I first started buying Beatle vinyls, the CDs were released, resulting in two versions of just about every record! It wasn't until I got them all on CD almost 10 years later that I had copies of every song. Releasing records such as "Yesterday" or "Hey Jude" is fine in and of itself but it still leaves the question of albums such as "Revolver" and "Rubber Soul." I can't help but be reminded in junior high asking for "Revolver" for Christmas in junior high, only to find "I'm Only Sleeping" wasn't on it -- the one song I really wanted in the first place!

Thomas Procyk (TMProcyk@aol.com): I am a young Beatles fan and have a few UK albums on CD, ("With The Beatles" and "Beatles For Sale"). Then, when I went to a record show and bought a few LPs of "Revolver" and "Rubber Soul," I was dissappointed when I found less tracks than there "should be" (compared to the CDs). I think that releasing the U.S. versions on CD would cause a similar problem. New fans, (or even old ones who don't know much about the differences) would go to the store and find TWO DIFFERENT "Rubber Souls"! One labled UK and the other U.S. Possibly, they'd look at the tracks, get even more confused, throw down both copies and leave the store disgusted.

Chris McIntyre (mac411@mail.idt.net): The Beatles did not want their music to sound that way. If Americans who grew up with thoes albums wanted a wave of nostalgia, they could listen to their records or the tapes. The Beatles themselves hated what was done to their albums. They don't deserve to be released on CD.

Todd Garland (CCA.ppal@worldnet.att.net@worldnet.att.net): Strongly against. Let's honor the Beatles' original intent.

Gary Flinn (gflinn@iavbbs.com): Even though I oppose the issuing of The Beatles' albums in the American format on CD, I do favour a box set of the American albums and only as a box set. The box would contain "Meet the Beatles," "The Beatles Second Album," "A Hard Day's Night," "Something New," "Beatles '65," "Beatles VI," "Help!," "Rubber Soul," "Yesterday ... And Today" and "Hey Jude." While we're at it, how about a two-CD set of The Beatles' Canadian albums, "Twist and Shout" and "Long Tall Sally."

Mitch Stewart (k7kf@unb.ca): Don't you think that recently Capitol/EMI/Parlophone/Apple/The Beatles, after giving us FOUR DOUBLE CD's worth of BBC,Anthology etc. have ALREADY given the public a little more than they actually deserve? I sincerely hope people aren't THAT nit-picky. I AM, as they say, a DIE HARD, but the idea of buying the American albums on CD would be a waste of time. A lot of not-as-diehards-as-I have already given diehards like me an opportunity to take their old American LP's off their hands. THOSE are collectible. Better to re-release the first seven in remastered versions, which is long overdue...even The Beach Boys have done THAT, and I thought THEY were GREAT! Just my personal opinions you see...

David J. Lennard (dijitil@gate.net): I think that they should not be released if John Lennon's estate, Paul McCartney, George Harrison and Ringo Starr don't want them to be. When the Beatles went into the studio in 1965 and 1966 to work on and record "Rubber Soul" and "Revolver," THEY had an unheard of idea up until then--they said, "Let's record a real artistic work of art from begining to end." That includes the three Lennon classic culled from the British version to be included on "Yesterday ... and Today." Don't you think "Revolver" is less than complete without those songs? How would we feel if "Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds," "Being for the Benefit of Mr. Kite," and "A Day in the Life" were left off Sgt. Pepper? We'd still love the LP cause of the other great tunes, but it sure as hell wouldn't compare to what we know and love with those three classics included. So there. P.S. If they are ever released American style, they should be sold at a discount rate. These aluminum discs ain't all that cheap when multiplied by 20.

Added Oct. 24, 1996

Tim Gerdes (tgerdes@planet.net): It struck me, after "Anthology" was released, how many new fans witnessed the Beatles story on television, fell in love with the music and then decided to start collecting Beatles albums. Why confuse a large and uninitiated segment of the buying public with versions of albums that the Beatles themselves found inferior. Many on the pro side of this argument reason that "it's how I grew up with the albums." Why chance molding the tastes of another generation on to these, IMHO, inferior versions?

Michael Urbanski (mikeu@daffy.sbi.com): With all the UK versions available, releasing US versions now would look like another Crapitol rip off. And it would be.

Camilo Olaya N. (c-olaya@uniandes.edu.co): I am 24 years and I am not American, so I don't feel anything for U.S. versions. I have all the British releases and I had the opportunity to listen to U.S. versions on tape and really these versions dont have the same "Flavor". I would never buy one U.S. version. They are different and they seem just commercial packages released just "to sell and earn money". Besides Capitol Records never was a Beatles friend.

Mark LeDrew (ledr5816@mars.rowan.edu): Speaking as a second generation Beatles fan who grew up listening to the British cds, I'd have to say that there's no good reason to release the American versions ESPECIALLY since they don't sound as the Beatles intended them to and the songs are in the wrong orders. Let's not mess with perfection!

Added Aug. 25, 1996

Harald (hdbhh@129.177.30.3): When I grew up, I could get both the U.S. and the U.K. versions of the Beatles' albums. Guess which I chose?

Dave McMullen (djm3@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca): I prefer the British format as that is how they were meant to be heard. That said, I do own copies of all the U.S. vinyl releases, including "Live at the Hollywood Bowl" and the Red and Blue albums. But I'm not interested in purchasing CDs of these if they are released.

Roxxan Hanson (pmrm@townsqr.com): I don't think that it is really necessary to have the U.S. albums released because you cna get all of the songs from the UK albums in the format that the Beatles wanted them in.

Tony Luebbert (luebbert@cencom.net): Let me mention something that seems off the subject, but really isn't. OK, I'm 17 years old and I want to buy a Rolling Stones album. OK, sounds reasonable enough. So, I go looking at the record stores around the area, finding about 2 gazillion Rolling Stones albums. Most of them seem kinda dinky. Now, I don't know what the deal is with the Rolling Stones albums. Maybe they have a gazillion. I don't know. But I was rather intimidated with all of these, you know. What if I pick out their only bad one or something? With the Beatles, you don't have that problem. You have the dozen or so releases and that's it. Throwing in a bunch of cruddy American version CDs would confuse the new Beatles fans. They wouldn't know what the heck to make of any of it. If they do release the American versions, they should do it in a boxed set, since the new fans -- teenagers -- would probably be less likely to buy a boxed set.

(no name): It's not the way the Beatles meant it and the Brit versions are better anyway.

Douglas Lee (Chris@waterw.com): The main reason against releasing the American albums is the fact that it insults the work of George Martin and the Beatles. They worked hard to get the albums just right and in perfect order and Capitol insulted their work by butchering up their albums. This it's fine with the British versions since it's the way the artists wanted it. But I think all the "Let It Be"/Get Back" tracks should be released on Anthology untouched by ..... Phil Spector. I think he is the real reason the Beatles split up.

cedavid@pegasus.rutgers.edu: I definitely wouldn't buy the U.S. albums on CD? Why would I want to buy REVOLVER with less songs on it (for example)? The UK release PAST MASTERS set up was a great idea. Plus, MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR is an original US album. I actually would have gone one step further in the opposite direction: dump the YELLOW SUBMARINE CD and put NORTHERN SONG, ALL TOGETHER NOW, HEY BULLDOG, and IT'S ALL TOO MUCH on PAST MASTERS 2. Aside from that, the UK CD releases are the most enjoyable and money saving way that Capitol could have released the disks.


Diego Sada Santos (dsada@infosel.net.mx): I sort of grew up with both U.S. and British versions of Beatles albums, since all Mexican releases before "Beatles for Sale" were identical to the U.S. versions. After that, all Mexico albums were identical to the British versions. I actually bought my first few Beatles albums in the States, but since "Sgt. Pepper" and "Abbey Road" didn't change much (save for the Pepper "inner groove") I didn't become aware of differences until I got to college in the U.S. I don't really think the U.S. albums should be released on CD, except for the "Live at the Hollywood Bowl" album, and maybe, "Hey Jude" and the U.S. version of "Rarities". The "Live" album should be released for obvious reasons. "Hey Jude", although it is 100% a Capitol marketing ploy, it does sort of give a quick overview of the Beatles development, and as a compilation, it is not that bad. As for "Rarities", there are some interesting tracks, and it does differ a bit from the British "Rarities" (that should come out as well), although I have mixed feelings about the "doctored" version of "Penny Lane", even when the Piccolo Trumpet finale is lovely! In general though, I appreciate the nostalgic value some fellow Beatlemaniacs put on these albums, but I think they should remain a thing of the past.

Michael Moore (kenmoore@pop.erols.com): I vehemently disagree with anyone who wants to have the U.S. versions released. I suppose one reason is that I am 17, and I did not grow up with those versions, I grew up with the British versions, so I feel no nostalgia. The U.S. versions are just awful packages (after listening to my father's LP collection). They sound distorted and the running order is changed. The tapes are bad, too. My friend purchased "Abbey Road" on cassette and I was surprised and annoyed that the album starts with "Something." The album was meant to start with "Come Together." That's the way The Beatles wanted it, and I'm sure we all agree of their musical talent, and why mess with talent? What if "Sgt. Pepper's.." started with "When I'm 64?" Overall, my opinion remains that the U.S. versions are bad, and they had their time and place, and that time was in the 1960s.

Jack Johnson (Jjohnson@virginia.k12.mn.us): I own every version of every Beatle's song ever released on CD. I am such a die hard Beatle fan I will almost feel obligated to purchase the American versions. If you really want to hear the American albums get the track listings and program your CD player to play the American albums. You won't know the difference!

Christianne McCann (christie@address.net): I think they should use the British albums instead of American albums because the British albums are the way the Beatles made it and that's how they want to put out to sell. I am pretty sure the don't want any record company taking apart their albums and making a whole different album out of their music. I do like some of the American albums, but, I think most of the CDs are the British albums and the American albums were put on record and tape...The only cD I've seen from here is "The Early Beatles", and on some of the British albums, there is more music, like in the American version of "Rubber Soul," they are missing "Drive My Car", "Nowhere Man" and "What Goes On." They also put a song that wasn't on the original, "It's Only Love," which was from "Help!" I think the American albums are no use because the U.S. could have just put out the British and the U.S. would have gotten the same music.

Elizabeth and Michael Waller (rbcwall@pcl.net): In the sixties, all I had was the U.S. versions. My favorite album was my "Rubber Soul." But now that I am in my forties and I have a complete CD collection of the original British versions. I love "Rubber Soul" the British way. I think the remaining Beatles have been screwed enough by Capital and other people owning their songs that they should have the final say in which version is released. Although it would be nice if the earlier ones were released in stereo.

Paul Driscoll (paulaa@ozemail.com.au): I think that the American albums should not be released they are too short and would be a rip off on CD format. Most are only 25 minutes long and you could fit them almost three times on one CD. What should happen is that the rarites from these albums should be put on one CD I.e. stereo version of "Thank you girl," etc. Also, the first 4 albums should be released in stereo.

David Robinson (robinsdj@phymat.bham.ac.uk): Three reasons. First, I agree with other people's comments that they should get the first four out in stereo, and maybe a couple of others in mono before looking to the U.S. versions. Actually, I'd rather they digitally remix the whole lot, but that's another story. Secondly, can you imagine the agreement between Capitol and Apple that would finally get this done? It would be one album per CD. Poor sound quality, expensive (compared to other artist's CDs), and, if I wanted to buy them in the U.K. they'd be imported, making them around 18 u.k.p. each. The result: The bootlegs would be cheaper and better than the official releases. Finally, a new fan walks into a record store, finds about 30 different albums in there, and walks out because they can't decide! P.S. as a Brit, I rather like the first few U.S. albums - the remix of "I Saw Her Standing There" KICKS, but I can hear it on the bootleg.

Mike Edsall (m.edsall@genie.geis.com): Not that I really care if they do come out, but I guess I just don't see any point in releasing them. As you know, I'm a first generation Beatle fan who grew up with "Meet the Beatles," "Second Album," "Something New," Beatles '65," "Beatles VI," "Yesterday and Today," etc. etc., and for a decade or more I was used to their running orders.
But while in college (1973-1977) I started building my collection of British albums and am long used to their running orders. I'm a pretty sentimental and nostalgic person, but I have absolutely no urge to get the albums in their American configurations. I wouldn't mind having a single CD that collects the odd/rare mixes (even the Dave Dexter echo-work on "She's a Woman" and "I Feel Fine") but as I said above, I don't see any point in issuing these on CD. It could only muddy the waters and confuse things further.
But like I said, my AGAINST vote leans more towards neutrality than anything else. If they did get released, there's no way I'd buy any of them, two-fers or not! Before they issued anything like that, I'd pray for these items to come out:

jmills@awod.com: I don't think that Capitol should release the U.S. Beatles albums on CD. Instead what Capitol, EMI and Apple should do is release the first 4 Beatles CD's in stereo.

joeyself@ipa.net: I frankly don't care, because I'm not going to spend any money on them for the reasons you mentioned: too much echo, too few songs, and different contents than that which the Fabs intended. However, put me in the AGAINST catagory, because if such a project were considered, it would likely interfere with the release of other, more worthy releases (the stereo first four leaps to mind). Plus, you can forget about them being released as two-fers, given the way the Beach Boys catalog is now being marketed. (I know, the Beach Boys may have had something to say about that, but you think for a minute Apple would give the fans more bang for the buck???)
With that being said, let me say a kind word about a couple of the Capitol releases. "Beatles '65" had a stronger song line-up than it's rough counterpart, "Beatles For Sale," because of the inclusion of the single" I Feel Fine"/"She's A Woman." I also found the Capitol "Meet The Beatles" to be stronger than the album which contained 9 of the same songs,"With The Beatles," because of the inclusion of "I Want To Hold Your Hand"/"This Boy" and the rocker "I Saw Her Standing There" from the first album in England.

billb@stpaul.lib.mn.us: I feel that the US configurations, added echo, etc. are best left as relics of a poor decision on Capitol's part. The Beatles had specific ideas in mind when they created their albums, and as the artists, creators, performers, etc. were the ones best able to decide how their albums were to be presented. Because the LPs exist in huge numbers, it should be easy for anyone who wants them to be able to find them. However, I think that releasing them on CDs would only be compounding a deliberate mistake that, ethically speaking, Capitol had no right to make in the first place, regardless of their, or EMI's, ownership. It was shabby treatment by of a record company of what was probably the biggest source of income they ever had.

SSoren9001@aol.com: Although I did not grow up listening to the Beatles during their initial splash in the sixties, I did become a huge fan by buying the American versions of the LPs in the seventies. Even so, I welcomed the chance to get the originally intended versions on import LPs whenever possible. To me, Capitol has always been the do-anything-for-a-buck kind of company. No wonder the Beatles gave them the butcher cover. I wonder if Capitol ever got the joke?
Anyway, I think that those old American versions are best laid to rest permanently. Now that I can hear what songs such as "She's a Woman" and "I Feel Fine" sound like without all that muddy reverb I can appreciate them much better. The extra reverb adds a cheesy AM top 40 quality. Ugh. Also, Capitol completely changed the thrust of albums such as Revolver with their selective withholding of certain songs. Why should Apple/EMI honor such inexcusable creative tampering by authorizing CD versions of these monstrosities?

HarchOhio@aol.com: I'm much more interested in having the mono versions of the British albums put on CD. "Rubber Soul," "Revolver," "Sgt. Pepper" (especially!) and the White Album all have distinctive, different mono mixes. These need to be issued for they truly represent the music the way The Beatles intended!

Steven Merzon@bender.com : Like just about everyone else, I grew up on the U.S. versions of the LPs. Whenever I grow nostalgic for these particular line ups, I just play the LP. Part of the enjoyment comes from handling a vinyl LP, looking at full-sized cover art and seeing the good old rainbow label. I can't say I miss the echo- drenched "She's A Woman" or any of the other Dave Dexter mixes. I don't think they should be preserved on CD. I would much rather EMI devote its effort toward releasing the first four titles in stereo, releasing mono versions of "The Beatles" and "Pepper", extending the Anthology series, etc.

drums@zork.tiac.net: Hi Steve..love your page and keep up the good work. I am a 45 year old musician and I grew up with the Beatles..I was always listening to the radio for the Beatle tracks that " we " never got until a few months after they were released in England. I always despised record companies for deleting songs from the Hollies, Yardbirds etc. So I guess I feel like we paid our dues in the 60's and now I enjoy the music of these bands in the original British format. So I guess I must disagree somewhat. Plus I wish they would release the first few Beatle albums on CD in stereo commercially. Now that would be nice..thanks again for the nice pages and if you want to expand someday..add the Searchers and the Hollies !!!...

jtrot@portal.ca: Absolutely NOT!!!!! The Capitol albums were corporate, not artistic. They were profit-minded, not fan-minded. They should not be rewarded with CDs! It diminished the true nature of the albums. Why do we need YESTURDAY AND TODAY anyway. When Past-Masters came out, all the songs are available. If Capitol did release them, what's to stop Canadian Capitol Records from doing the same and further confusing the issue: BEATLEMANIA: WITH THE BEATLES, TWIST AND SHOUT and SOMETHING NEW were different or unique to Canada. Leave Parlophone, Apple alone! (signed) A self-proclaimed Beatologist,.

vdmk@theworks.com: They are better in the orginal order. If you want the U.S. order, record want you want on tape and you can make your own Beatle albums.

potra002@gold.tc.umn.edu: I don't agree with releasing the U.S. albums on CD at all!! Capitol Records pulled one of the biggest money making scams back in the 60's by chopping up early Beatle albums and adding singles to make even more albums. Look at the "Help!" album for instance. I have nothing against instrumental music, but come on. That was a huge scam. The songs off of the true to what the Beatles wanted, the British version of "Help!", were stretched over 4 (!!) U.S. albums. British "Help!" album songs are on the U.S. albums: "Beatles VI" (also includes songs from "Beatles For Sale"), of course the "Help!" soundtrack, "Rubber Soul" ("I've Just Seen a Face"), and "Yesterday and Today". Another thing to point out is that both The Beatles and George Martin were concerned with giving people their money's worth. That's why they had so many songs on their albums and didn't put many records (that were already out as singles) on their albums. That in itself makes me feel good about the British versions finally being out here. Please don't get me wrong. The Beatles rule in any format!

rontko1@agt.net: I, too, "grew up" with the U.S.versions of the Beatles releases.The day I found out I could get the British releases on CD, I was orgasmic! After listening to the British releases on CD for the last few years, I find the U.S. recordings unlistenable. Re-issue them if you must, but what's the point??

shosler@cybergate.net: The British versions were how the Beatles intended their material released. I can't think of any good reason to release the U.S. records. What a rip.

mxh149@psu.edu: No way!!!!!!!! The Beatles were recording *artists* who put enormous care and energy into their output. What Capitol did to those albums was a tragedy and robbed American fans of seeing the true artistic development of the Beatles. I'm glad I am young enough to have discovered the Beatles on CD where their true exploration can be seen album through album. If people want to hear the Capitol track progresion, put your multi-CD player on program and tape it.

Alexander Stern, U. of Rochester (PubLabUser@clarc.cc.rochester.edu): Speaking as a lifelong Beatles fan (who did grow up on the U.S. albums), I would not be in favor of the U.S. albums coming out on CD. First, I respect the Beatles too much to argue with the running order of the albums that they, along with George Martin, put together. Why, for example, would you want to hear "Revolver" minus three out of five of John Lennon's contributions? Or "A Hard Day's Night" and "Help!" minus the entire second sides but including instrumental music from the films? Then there were albums like "Yesterday And Today" and "Hey Jude" that had no U.K. counterpart whatsoever. We're not just talking about record albums. We're talking about art. For my money, the early Beatles sound MUCH better in mono than in stereo (I can't stand John's double-tracked vocal on the U.S. version of "If I Fell") . As to the question of whether the line up on "Meet The Beatles" is more or less exciting then that of "With The Beatles" I point to the loss of "Please Mister Postman", "Devil In Her Heart", "You've Really Got A Hold On Me" and "Money." Finally, we should consider the fact that the UK albums represent the Beatles development from garage band ("Please Please Me") to touring band ("With The Beatles, "A Hard Day's Night", "Beatles For Sale", and "Help!"), to recording entity ("Rubber Soul", and "Revolver") . The US versions, jumbled as they are, obscure this progression ("I'll Be Back" lifted from "A Hard Day's Night" and slapped on "Beatles '65", for example) . The US albums were a mistake that should be left in the past.

ringo@postoffice.ptd.net: The English albums are the way it was meant to be.

msmoorto@oakland.edu: I really do not see the need to re-release all of the U.S. albums. Rather, just re-release the first four albums in stereo. Why weren't they released in stereo in the first place?