ES-Say #30 "Houston, we have a problem..." The loss of Tug Of War

As Tug Of War(1982), is scheduled to be re-released on October 2nd, there is an issue. A HUGE issue. Unless your willing to shell out a ton of money for the box set version, the original studio mix will not be included on the standard or delux versions. What those reasonably priced version will include instead, is an brand new 2015 remix from the master tapes. Not the version that was remastered in 1993 or the original version from 1982.

I think I understand what this means. A remaster from the Master tapes basically cleans up a recording. You can hear individual channels(voice, piano, drum recordings) a record a bit more richer, either more or less predominantly to achieve an improved sound. However, it rarely features new sounds because that would change the entire album completely. Yes, that's exactly what's going to happen here with the 2015 version. It will sound significantly different because they(Paul and whomever, I won't know til I read the new liner notes) are going to start from scratch. Using the master tapes and basically do a hack job(not necessarily with bad results), newly remixing the album with an intention to present a different version (that's what a remix does). I would hope no brand new recordings(2005) would be added in with the 1982 recordings, but having a "new" remix in general is fine and welcome.

What's not so fine and welcome is that I realised I no longer have the 1987(?) CD copy of the 1982 LP Vinyl. I need to buy a used copy as the previous cd copies are out of print. I thought I could be able to find it on iTunes. It's nowhere to be seen on iTunes, being replaced with pre-orders for the standard and delux 2015 versions. EBay didn't seem to have many people selling the '87 or '93 Holland remasters(I recommended all of the latter CDs). I'm not sure I will win the eBay copy I'm watching(an eBay option to keep an auction saved on your account).

I think I feel this should be in comparassion(poorly) to the plot of Paul's wonderfully overlooked Turkey film(which I personally love), Give My Regards To Broad Street. For those of you who forgot or choose to forget what the facacta plot was, here's my version in a nutshell.

Paul McCartney stars as himself in 1984 trying to find the Master tapes of his "new" album which has been reportedly "stolen" by an employee\friend named Harry. Paul's faith in Harry drives the film into a 90 min brand new live version sing-along of previously released Beatles, Wings, and Solo songs peppered with a few new songs. Actual some of the songs from "Tug Of War" were performed live in the movie, and released on the movie sound track.

Now, I've confused myself completely, I was going to point out that in the film the original tapes are feared destroyed. Basically what's happening now if you remix and entire album and scrap\distroy the old one from existance (ignore the fact that the old '82 version is included in the 2015 box set because its not as widely accessible to the "AVERAGE PERSON"...). So, with my trying to make a point with the original version of Tug of War suffering from this new 2015 remix version(essential trying to forget about the original), I have discovered something else.

The soundtrack to Broadstreet(1985) features new recordings of at least three Tug of War(1982) songs- Ballroom Dancing, Wonderlust, and Take It Away(maybe the song Tug Of War also, but I'm too lazy to look at the CD soundtrack). This means that parts of Tug of War('82) have already, technically, been re-recorded with different arrangements. So not only has the idea of changing songs on Tug of War('82 LP, '87 CD) been done for Broadstreet. Those several songs are going to get a THIRD rearranged version?????????? There wasn't anything wrong with the 84 versions, they did sound very good but a THIRD version, 31 years later?!?!?

I really need a lie down...

ES-Say #29 My somewhat hatred of "New" Beatles Merchandise.

Collecting Beatles and\or McCartney branded goods(or merchandise) is a wonderful hobby but it's important to focus on a particular medium(for example-vinyl, books, clothing). Fans may choose to collect everything. However, I find collecting without a preference to be both tedious and difficult to maintain. I personally don't want to add more categories to the categories I am currently maintaining.
When I look to add to my collection, I have avoided looking at "new official Beatles goods" in the past. I define these new goods as valueless due to being mass produced by Apple corps within the last ten years. Overpriced and designed to be attractive to a new audience, it really doesn't interest me. Or it didn't really make a ripple in my collection until I realised I actually have a "new goods collection".
There needs to be some clarification- new goods have been produced since The Beatles broke up in 1970. I can't refer to goods from the 70s-90s as "new", because a significant amount of time has past. My opinion is that anything produced in the last decade is categorise as "new" and prior items are collectable with some reseverations to its rarity and value.
The worn 1995 T-shirt I have could be a collectable but the condition is poor and would not make much of a profit. I'm not necessarily looking to sell newer merchandise, but recently, I have been collecting a few goods that could possibly (fingers crossed) be sold in 10-20 years time.
The reason I broke my initial disinterest in valueless new goods, was because I started to see things that seemed collectable or stuff that I wanted to use without caring about what happens to it. Last year, I bought two of the same coffee cups with the "Live from the BBC volume 2" logo. I will continue to buy the new goods for new cd releases because some of the Promo merchandise produced around the time for Anthology(mid 1990s) seems to have been gaining both interest and value.
Recently, I found espresso mugs and chose the "Hard Days Night" design. Produced in 2014, they are wildly available, but I have no interest in the Abbey Road or Sgt. Pepper designs. I have some sort of reasoning that the wildly popular designs of the aforementioned are so common, it will saturate the market and never gain the value a lesser common design will gain. Call it what you want, but with my interest to less common new goods, at the very least becomes a talking point based around limited edition productions(hopefully).

In the video above, I have filmed some of these "new" Beatles goods that for whatever reason, I haven't been able to pass up. The blue travel mug is a good example of a valueless but attractive purchase as I had to find it on eBay and couldn't find it in the shops due to a couple of the several designs being widely sold and re-ordered with no intention of stocking any more designs. I guess this means if I feel something is truely "limited edition" I want to have it. The other examples in the video for whatever reason peaked my interest. Previously, I felt all the modern goods were a waste of time because the Beatles broke up 45 years ago. Now, I'm not so convinced. This does not include "new" Paul McCartney goods, because he's still producing new material. (Many of these new goods from tours and cds are limited and demand higher prices). But, when it comes to new Beatle goods alot of it is rather, well, a gamble...
Please note: Loyal Facebook group members of this blog are treated to additional content. You are welcome to join by sending your Facebook profile link to me in the "post a comment section" (total comments to date-zero) to be added to the group!

Es-Say #28 Let's talk about "true", " real", and "original" fans!

   

Fans are (mostly) all the same 

Over the lifetime of this website the initial theme has remained the same- I, the author, am only one of many Paul McCartney fans. I am not better or worse than any other music fan. I am simply a writer who likes to write about my fan experiences, mostly about my music collection which I started as a teen in 1993. Being a Paul(as a solo artist) fan for 20 something years does not make me a "real", "true","super" or any other adjective that would acknowledge that I've got some sort of leg up on other people that like The Beatles or Paul McCartney.

What I am is a fan just like someone in 2015 who has just bought a Paul album for the first time. A new fan is commonly known as a "newbie". But a "newbie" might know about something I have no knowledge of- a remix, recent news, a promotional item, etc. In some ways, I too, am a "newbie" and in no way should I be doubting another persons level of fandom.

Similarly, I have little respect or patience for people who want to express their fan loyality as greater than my own. The truth is these sorts of fans usually have one thing greater than myself, which is a lot of disposable income to spend to continue to keep up to contribute to Paul McCartney's income. Let's ignore that Sir Paul has an estimated worth of at least £800 million. The misconception is that a fan's superiority is equivalent to a musician owing them, personally, for faithfully supporting(aka moola) them through the years. Recently, on the subject of The Paul McCartney Achieve Collection, someone wrote that only buying the deluxe versions of those CDs and not the Box Set collection, is what the average non-fan person would buy. My reaction to this, as I own all the delux CDs sans two and no box sets is extreme pity that anyone would believe their financial position equals being a genuine fan. If that's the measure of a real fan, I want to take my toys and go home. Now, with Tug of War having a 1,000 copy limited run of a super deluxe box set, I did not even attempt to order it. The people who want to basically brag about owning this, I don't want to associate with, but I tolerate these people until the "I'm a better fan" declaration is implyed or said.

As I'm sure some of you may relate, proving yourself to be a big fan is pointless, usually due to another attempting to prove themselves greater with statistics which again, only equally to greater amounts of money spent. For example, I've been to four concerts, yet there will always be a person who's gone to fourty and they will tell you what happened(financially) by telling you what merchandise and seat packages they bought without you even asking or really caring. I recently enjoyed concert #4 by simply spending time with a fellow fan and cracking jokes left and right about Paul. How can we get away with this behaviour and call ourselves fans? OK, we're happy to say we are 100% not fans just so you will leave us alone. Bygones be bygones, et all.

So, why should any of my rant matter? Unfortunately, it is unavoidable but it boggles the mind why people feel the need to knock others for less involvement(again, M-O-N-E-Y) in Paul McCartney's career. Most musicians do not discriminate over fan status because they have private lives. As much as a meeting an musician seems like the ultimate experience for a fan, it's a general and usually forgettable experience for the musician. Paul has said previously that he relys on fans to have his career statistics, but he never gives those people individual shout outs. Why? Because it's "too many people" to mention individually.

No one should feel invalidated for being an average fan. We're all special and we all spend money on the musician because we "appreciate" them and they "appreciate" our money, admiration, and devotion in general. It's my opinion and I'm allowed to have one as a person(not necessarily as a fan).

Now that's enough on that topic, I have enough Paul related problems to attend to, starting with which Linda McCartney frozen meal to have for dinner and neglected reading and listening materials to get to. Viva la average fandom!

Es-Say #27 Just Say No: Record Show Relapse

 

 ...And one CD turned into six...

...meanwhile, subconsciously, 45s had to match...

It was a day to relax, so I decided to head to the city to attend a bi-monthly record show. Usually I come home with a few items and stick to a budget. This time, "budget" didn't seem to matter,even though it should. I figured I saved about £15 asking for discounts, but I wished I walked away sooner.
I had an idea of what I was looking to buy and found it straight away-TMOQ Gazette Volume 19. After that purchase, my brain went out the window. Let's review each item and why I parted with my cash.
Summer-Heat-Induced Paul McCartney and Beatles purchases

1. TMOQ Gazette Vol 19- A collection of the original 70s film footage that eventual was recycled for use in The Beatles Anthology Film, Plus various bonus 60s videos. Reason For Buying- The Gazette is hard to ignore because it complies past attractive material. I taped Anthology 20 years ago off PBS when I had a VCR and my television had a contrasting problem where the picture was tinted pink. You try watching Anthology in psychedelic colours for years and tell me I shouldn't be greatful for the availability of raw footage on DVD...
2. Help The Alternative Help- live and alternative takes. Reason For Buying- need it, wanted it, got it. Basically, a "questionable release" of a "questionable release", so not too expensive.
3. The Beatles Live at Last- I have to devote another blog to this as the discussion involves copywriter law that has gone " free-for-all" to get Beatles Live material from 50 years ago which is official in the public domain for dealers to attempt to sell to schmos like me... Reason For Buying- 2015 UK release of live '63\'64 material. 16 tracks of fairly common recording that for whatever screwed up reason(that reason copywrite nightmare) CANNOT be sold in the US. (Again needs a separate blog of drawn out moaning concerning the topic of Live Copywrite law changes).
4. Paul McCartney B-Sides Himself- Macca various "B-Sides" Reason For Buying- I saw the words "Mole Mix" which meant The  "MaccaMeri unhealthy craze to all things 'Give My Regards To Broadstreet' alert" was activated. Just like the "MaccaMeri unhealthy craze to all things 'Goodnight Tonight' alert", not much thought goes into opening the wallet. The day I get the actual vinyl " Mole Mix" of "No More Lonely Nights" margaritas for all but this CD copy is welcomed to own.
5. Wings Back To The Egg Trevor Jones collection Volume 2- Mostly the Egg material from Jones with separate sources of alternative mixes. If it's half as good as "Wings At The Speed Of Sound" Trevor Jones collection, the BTTE one should be pretty decent. Reason For Buying- An over 7 minute version of "'Goodnight Tonight", which I assume is probably the "Disco Mix" that I have shelved the need for collecting on vinyl due to focusing on purchasing all version of the hit songs on 45 rpm. (I can't make sense of this either, but I didn't have that 7 min version at all).
6. Paul McCartney Toyko 1993 2nd Night- numbered limited edition two discs of touring for "off the ground" Reason For Buying- not much thought went into this but I got it due to reasonable price, the set list, and the word "Toyko". A candy-in-front-of-a-baby moment.
7. Wings With A Little Luck Australian 45- Reason For Buying- Australian and red labeled with the full version of the song. Blind purchase for £5.
8. Susie and The Red Stipes Seaside Woman a&m 45- Linda Mac and Friends release from Germany. Reason For Buying- It's German issued , what more can I say?

   9. Wings Hi Hi Hi b\w C Moon Apple 45- A Belgium release with         a nice cover and on Apple for £5. No need to list a reason for         buying, it just sorta happened. . .

Not sure how long it will take to listen to all the CDs, but it was a a successful visit to "London Town" yet I might have learn to hold off on shows for awhile if I like eating on a daily basis. Something about the cute one keeps me interested regardless...(I think I have a 1984 movie to go rewatch...again!).

Until copywrite law gets me riled up again, dear readers....

Es-Say #26- More Unseen Beatles Photos? Everybody's Got Time For That...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3155728/Rare-Beatles-photos-uncovered-Fab-Four-smiling-laughing-lounge-pool-Miami-Ed-Sullivan-appearance.

I've spent the better part of the week trying to find out if my new (old) Mac sig is authentic. Now, Im at the point of standing on my head to try to see if that will show me what tell tale signs of "realness" it has.

I have nearly missed out on how these newly discovered Miami photos(at the above link) are going to be distributed, if at all. Maybe I just like old pictures of a 22 year old in a bathing suit.

In the meantime, all these 2015 magazine features are coming out.

I wound up reading the esquire article online on a long train ride and the rest are collecting dust because I've just been too busy to relax and read Uncut or Record Collector. I shouldn't need to read the Uncut article as I was at the Paul concert at the 02(1st night) the magazine reviews. In fact, I think I did briefly look it over, but I like David Byrne so I'll have to make time for it.

Back to The Beatles: Record Collector has the 2nd part of that interesting history of the Star Club recordings story. I want to read that too and possibly find one of those several boots(er...I ment "questionable recordings"), from those sessions. I need a 25 hour day...

Too my delight McCartney has spoke out against next weeks England vote to relax the Fox Hunting ban. Wildlife doesn't deserve this horrible action to be passed. #KeepTheBan all day Monday on Twitter people, please! 

Yours in Beatlesdom...

Es-Say #25- Jackpot!...Or Not?

Greetings sports fans! This is either the best post this blog will ever feature (unless we meet you-know-who), or a complete disaster. Let's get to the story...

The photo above is my new LP of Mary Hopkins debut Apple album (UK version) from 1969. I paid roughly 15x what this fair condition disc is worth on it own(about $75). Yet if you look above it seems to be signed in pen by some guy named "Raul McCartney". And then there's this...

" Love and best wishes from Mary", it says. Hmmm.

I pause for a moment to scream the following "what the f@##£k do I now own?" Is this a fake or real?

The reason I ask is the circumstances that convinced me I might actually have something that I got dirt cheap. If you ever browse autographs online supposedly signed by "a Beatle" you know many of them are fake and the legitimate ones cost ridiculous amounts of money. Now, that I decided to buy this record from an owner of an auction house thrift store, I'm either one of the luckiest biotches around or as The Beatles song fittingly goes *ahem* "IMA Loooooooosah!"

OK, so looking at the cover(and the back), and after looking at some period autographs, I conclude it's one of three options-

A) Paul McCartney signed the front and Mary Hopkins signed the back (The Jackpot scenario)

B) Paul McCartney signed the front and "Some other guy" signed the back(honestly, not necessarily Paul).

C) The whole thing is as legitimate as myself tracing 

an autograph (actually, I'm not that bad).

At the very least I can learn about Mary Hopkins and listen to her interpretation of my "close personal friend," Donovan's song(I'm obviously kidding but I did meet him twice).

So you be the judge. Is it possible that a deciest man who was related to a television personality had this in his record collection? Or did I leave this shop deceived yet they promised to return my money if I can prove otherwise. All's I know is I dragged a bin bag home and had a shmata on my head for 45 mins while walking around in the blazing sun and passing a "McCarthy Driving School" sign (not McCartney), thinking I might be that "Lucky Biotch" I mentioned earlier? Do you think I'm lying? Obviously, you haven't read this blog...

Es-Say #24- "Out There UK\Europe 2015" Pt 2- The Maccatastic Video Blog Special including actual photos snapped by this blog. (Pt 3- TBA)