1963, March 5: Recording: Details

(above) George Martin and friends discussing "From Me to You" in the studio.

GLOSSARY & ABBREVIATIONS

2T = twin-track = two-track Stereo recording

BD = breakdown = unsuccessful take ended prematurely

ET = edit take = take to fix a faulty or missing section of a song

FS = false start = unsuccessful take ended more prematurely than breakdown

M = Mono

RT = rhythm take = complete take of song, before SI

SI = superimposition = take to lay new material over existing take (a.k.a. overdub)

_______________________________________________________________________

GENERAL INFORMATION

A Day in the Life. Before the session began, The Beatles went to the EMI canteen to enjoy tea with George Martin, where pictures were taken. After this, they proceeded to the studio where the boys introduced Martin to “From Me to You.” The producer said, “I used to sit on my high stool in the studio and the boys would play me what they had brought in to record. I'd listen to the basic idea of the song, perhaps on an acoustic guitar, and I'd help to decide on the structure of the introduction, where the solo should go, the ending and the final length of the song - never longer than 2:45; otherwise, we wouldn't get it on the radio!”¹.

Photos from the canteen and in the studio this day can be found here and here.

Anything I Can Do. John forgot to bring his harmonica to this session, famously borrowing one from Abbey Road’s Malcolm Davies.

EMI Reels. I will be segregating the events of this day in terms of EMI Reels, that is, tape designation numbers given to the recordings. For John Barrett’s EMI reel notes and John Winn’s details on these notes, go: here.

_______________________________________________________________________

EMI Reel E49015

(Afternoon, start about 2:30pm)

The entire contents of this reel are available as bootleg.

“FROM ME TO YOU”

2T, Takes 1-7 RT, Takes 1/6 FS or BD, Take 7 “best”

“THANK YOU GIRL”

(initially called “Thank You Little Girl”)

2T, Takes 1-6 RT, Takes 2/3 FS or BD, Take 6 “best”

“THANK YOU GIRL”

(still called “Thank You Little Girl”)

2T, Takes 7-13 ET, Take 13 “best”

These edit takes were to improve the ending. Take 6 and Take 13 were edited together this date (ref: Barrett's notes). A further harmonica overdub was required on March 13 (see that entry), mixing held over until that date.

“FROM ME TO YOU”

2T, Takes 8-13 SI, Takes 8/9/10/12 used

At this point, the boys were so nonplussed by “From Me to You” that it was considered to be the flip side for “Thank You Girl.” Thus, to beef up this song’s prospects, George Martin (according to several sources) suggested harmonica riffs and flourishes at various points. This appears to have been upheld by John: “We nearly didn't record it because we thought it was too bluesy at first; but, when we'd finished it and George Martin had scored it with harmonica, it was all right”².

[Sidebar. For John, the harmonica shtick was beginning to pale: “The first gimmick was the harmonica... We started using it on ‘Love Me Do’ just for arrangements, 'cause we used to work out arrangements. And then we stuck it on ‘Please Please Me’ and then on ‘From Me to You’ and then it went on and on. Then we dropped it - it got embarrassing”³]

They planned harmonica overdubs (SI) for three sections: the intro, the middle-eight (also known as “call-and-response” or “solo”) section, and the coda (ending).

(Take 8) While Take 7 played through, John added harmonica SI to the intro [successful], and attempted (with Paul on bass, George on guitar) the same for the middle-eight [unsuccessful]. George Martin stopped the recording at this point. The EMI reel contains only these two bits, the in-between (0:07-1:03) missing because it was later edited out and used for the final master (that is, Take 8 was used for parts, Take 7 left extant for posterity). The intro to Take 8 would receive an additional overdub (harmony vocal, Take 12).

(Take 9) George Martin started the tape (Take 7) about 8 seconds before the middle-eight, and John (again, with Paul and George) had another go at that section’s harmonica overdub [successful] as well as one for the coda [unsuccessful]. The tape was stopped at that point, and John asked, “Was I meant to be playing there?” As with Take 8, the successful SI here (the middle-eight) was edited out and used for the final master, the EMI reel reflecting this.

(Take 10) George Martin started the tape (Take 7) about 11 seconds before the coda, and John redid that section’s harmonica overdub [successful]. As with Takes 8 and 9, the successful SI here was edited out and used for the final master, leaving only the lead-in bit (as heard on the EMI reel).

(Take 11) Still not satisfied with the intro, the boys (ostensibly at George Martin’s suggestion) decided to add harmony vocals. Starting the tape (Take 7), they overdubbed humming [not used]. This outtake can be heard on the EMI reel.

(Take 12) On the second stab at the intro harmony vocal overdub, they chanted the familiar “da-da-da da-da-dun-dun-da,” which proved to be the one [used]. As with previous takes, this successful SI was edited out and used for the final master (the bits left over heard on the EMI reel).

(Take 13) Experimentally, the same chant was attempted at a higher pitch [not used]. This outtake can be heard on the EMI reel.

Takes 1-7 were recorded as twin-tracks, two tracks recorded simultaneously. The Stereo master for the “best” take (7) sent the instruments hard (wide) to the Left channel, vocals hard to the Right. For the SI takes 8-13, Take 7 was transmitted (played) in Stereo from one tape machine into another, while the microphones used for overdubs were patched to both channels (possibly by use of a Y-connector). Thus, on the EMI reel, the overdubs appear Center, approximately thus (“I” = instrumental track, “V” = vocals track, “SI” = overdubs):

Left _I________O________V_ Right

Editing and mixing for “From Me to You” took place March 14, 1963 (see that entry).

QUOTES FOR “From Me to You”

“The Beatles have a certain follow-up hit with ‘From Me To You,’ but if this average song was done by a less prominent group it would mean little. An up-tempo number with a just so-so melody, it is not nearly so outstanding in originality as ‘Please Please Me.’ It's a best seller, inevitably, but the group ought to be able to do something better than this as a follow up to an initial hit”⁴.

“Besides a catchy tune and deceptively-complex arrangement, ‘From Me To You’ has a difficult-to-pigeon-hole musical style. After all, is it rock or pop, blues or skiffle? Maybe it's just unmistakably Early Beatles... Those tight vocal harmonies with their flashes of passionate falsetto, the drum fills, the harmonica hook phrase, the personal pronouns, and so many other details were becoming both trend-setting and a bit formulaic by that point, and who could really blame them, given the roll they were so obviously on?... Several characteristic ingredients in the arrangement would eventually become almost cliché trademarks: (1) The vocal part features a duet virtually throughout. Granted, the many flashes of two-part harmony are separated by long stretches of the same line sung in unison by Paul and John, but there is no vocal solo part here; (2) Those flashes of vocal harmony, make frequent use of open fifths and falsetto singing; (3) Drum fills are carefully deployed at special, structural or dramatic points in the song, not at liberty; (4) An overdubbed harmonica is used to introduce the hook phrase; (5) And what sounds like it might be a simple oom-pah bass part actually features a snapped rhythm of dotted quarters and eighth notes in alternation... For the sake of variation - and avoidance of foolish consistency - they add in the second bridge a novel touch of two-part harmony at the very beginning of the section. Note how, true to form, Paul's backing part yet again starts off beneath John's lead, only to jump over it a few notes into the phrase... Nowhere is the uniqueness of this song (in spite of its recycled ingredients) more evident than in the meaning of its lyrics”⁵.

“Dismissed in most accounts of their career as a transition time-marker between ‘Please Please Me’ and ‘She Loves You,’ ‘From Me to You’ was actually a brilliant consolidation of the emerging Beatles sound... That it was specifically designed to accomplish this testified to the canny practicality of the group’s songwriting duo... The variation surprise in ‘From Me to You’ consists of a sudden falsetto octave leap, a motif first tried on the chorus of ‘Please Please Me’... The Four Seasons, then climbing the UK charts with ‘Big Girls Don’t Cry,’ employed similar falsetto and almost certainly influenced The Beatles in this respect. Yet where the Americans built falsetto into their four-part harmony, The Beatles wielded it as an isolated device, and it was mainly these sudden hair-raising wails that made their early records so rivetingly-strange... Their deftness and adaptability in the studio was already far beyond the reach of their immediate competitors”⁶.

“Nonsense words in pop are often filler for something that needs fleshing out, but with The Beatles these devices are rarely gratuitous, even this early on... The ‘da-da-da, da-da-dun-dun, dah’ at the top of ‘From Me to You’ is a melodic teaser, sung rather them played on guitar to voice the nameless feelings that live inside every teenager... Every advantage is taken to make one minute and forty-nine seconds swell with life... When they inflect the end of the bridge with a new color (augmenting the chord on ‘satisfied’), it propels the falsetto ‘ooh!’ and Ringo’s pert fill naturally... The tight writing unleashes energy rather than strapping it in... Makes every instant count”⁷.

(George) “The third single, ‘From Me To You,’ was really important, because that put the stamp on it. We'd had the first one, ‘Love me Do,’ which did well. Then they let us back in the studio and we did ‘Please Please Me,’ then we had the album, and then ‘From Me To You,’ the success of which assured us some fame”⁸.

(Paul) “I'd come back from a club and I was just getting to bed and I heard the milkman whistling ‘From Me To You’ (whistles). I thought ‘That's it, I've arrived - the milkman's whistling my tune’”⁹.

EMI Reel E49016

(Evening)

The entire contents of this reel are available as bootleg.

“THE ONE AFTER 909”

(also notated “The One After Nine O’ Nine”)

2T, Takes 1-4 RT, Takes 1/3/4 FS or BD, Take 5 ET

Some minutes were still available, so The Beatles attempted to lay down this additional song (according to Lewisohn, “What Goes On” was also in mind, but they ran out of patience and/or time).

(Take 1) When this attempt breaks down, John snaps at Ringo, “What are you doing? Are you out of your mind?!”

(Take 2) At the end of this complete run-through, John comments on George’s sloppy guitar playing, “What kind of solo was that?”

(Take 3) This time, Paul can’t keep up, and John demands, “What are you doing?!” Paul complains, “It’s murder.”

(Take 4) Finally, it’s John’s turn to make a mistake, and he yells, “Bloody hell!” Paul gleefully turns the tables, “It’s you!” This was considered “best” for no apparent reason.

(Take 5) This edit piece was meant to replace the section from the solo to the final chorus. It was adequate.

In his comments on Barrett’s notes, Winn wrote, “An edit of takes 4 and 5 was prepared, perhaps at the end of this session, which turned up on a 1976 in-house reel, and eventually on Anthology 1.” However, in Way Beyond Compare, Winn wrote that “there is no documentation to suggest that a complete take was ever assembled in 1963... In April 1976, a trial edit of takes 4 and 5 was made.” It is Winn’s latter comment which appears to be correct, upheld by both Lewisohn’s and Barrett’s silence on such an edit.

“The One After 909” was resurrected and rerecorded in 1969 for Let it Be.

_______________________________________________________________________

¹ Lewisohn, Recording Sessions, p.30

² Miles, The Beatles in Their Own Words, p.79

³ Rolling Stone interview with Jann Wenner, conducted December 1970, printed Jan 21, 1971, published as Lennon Remembers (2001, Verso); this particular quote paraphrased for The Beatles Anthology

⁴ Melody Maker review, Apr 13, 1963

⁵ Alan W. Pollack, Beatles musicologist

⁶ MacDonald, Revolution in the Head

⁷ Riley, Tell Me Why

⁸ The Beatles Anthology, p.94

⁹ Guinness Book of World Records BBC interview with David Frost & Norris McWhirter; reprinted Club Sandwich #41, p.6

GENERAL REFS: Lewisohn, Recording Sessions; Winn, Way Beyond Compare; Sulpy, The Complete Beatles’ Audio Guide (2006 ed)

_______________________________________________________________________

Tom Wise
gengar843@msn.com

Although I use quotes from sources, or cited fact, much of the material on this and other pages of my blog is original, from my own pen. This is not cut-and-paste, it is a work of art. Copyright © 2010 Tom Wise.

1963, March 5: Back-Story

(above) poster for Helen Shapiro tour, March 2, 1963

"FROM ME TO YOU"

Due to their increasing popularity, the Beatles had been asked to be part of a British national tour beginning February 2, 1963. For this stint, they began at the bottom of a six-act bill featuring 16-year-old superstar Helen Shapiro (voted Best British Female Singer, 1961 and 1962) as the headliner, with The Kestrels and Kenny Lynch also in tow. During this tour, the “Please Please Me” single moved up the UK charts until, during the week of March 2, The Beatles had their first #1 (disputed among sources). At the same time (the exact day being either February 27 or February 28), while traveling by tour bus between shows, John and Paul wrote “From Me to You.”

This song was “very much co-written”^{1 (149)}, “both of us, very much together”². John said, “I think the first line was mine. I mean I know it was mine (hums melody of first line). And then, after that, we took it from there”^{3 (168)}.

The inspiration for this song derived from the New Musical Express letters column. In 1963, John said, “As I explained recently, Paul McCartney and I wrote the number on a coach journey between York and Shrewsbury. We were on the Helen Shapiro tour at the time. What puzzled us was why we'd thought of a name like ‘From Me To You.’ In fact, it had me thinking until only recently, when I picked up the NME to see how we were doing in the charts. Then I realized - we'd got the inspiration from reading a copy on the coach! Paul and I had been talking about one of the letters in the ‘From You To Us’* column”². Though this is indisputable, Paul muddied the waters somewhat when he recalled, “At the back of the bus, Roy Orbison would be writing something like ‘Pretty Woman,’ so our competitiveness would come out, which was good. He would play us his song, and we'd say, ‘Oh, it's great, Roy. Have you just written that?’ But we'd be thinking, ‘We have to have something as good.’ The next move was obvious - write one ourselves. And we did. It was ‘From Me To You’”². Paul’s memory here is absolutely horrible; the Orbison tour began May 18, 1963, well after “From Me to You” was written, recorded and released!

* In some sources, the name of the letters column is incorrectly identified as “From Us to You.”

John relayed, “Anyway, there were we, not taking ourselves seriously. Just fooling about on the guitar. This went on for a while. Then we began to get a good melody line and we really started to work at it. Before that journey was over, we'd completed the lyric, everything. We were so pleased, we knew we just had to make it the A-side”⁴*. Contrarily, some sources (MacDonald, Revolution in the Head, for example) assert that John and Paul were not “fooling about” but wrote this song under pressure from George Martin and/or Brian Epstein, either or both anxious that the Beatles should follow up “Please Please Me” with another hit. While no doubt their manager and their producer had such feelings, and likely these feelings were conveyed, there is in this case no indication of such urgency (though it would seem natural enough that the ever-ambitious songwriters would push each other to achieve their dreams).

* Another source, The Beatles Off The Record (Badman, 2001), for some reason, splices together two different quotes. The Beatles Anthology paraphrases.

Paul noted, “We wrote ‘From Me to You’ on the bus”⁵. But John said, “We were writing it in a car, I think”^{3 (168)}. It may be that by “car” John meant any vehicle at all, from a train to a bus. Schaffner wrote that this song was “knocked off in the back of the van on the way to work”⁶. However, unless by “van on the way to work” he meant “tour bus on the way to the next gig,” Schaffner was incorrect.

“From Me to You” had two intentions. The first was personalization. John said, “The words weren’t really all that difficult – especially as we had decided quite definitely not do anything that was at all complicated. I suppose that is why we often had the words ‘you’ and ‘me’ in the titles of our songs. It's the sort of thing that helps the listeners to identify with the lyrics”⁷. Paul added, “A lot of our songs – ‘From Me to You’ is another – were directly addressed to our fans... We were in a rut, obviously!”⁵, and “There was a little trick we developed early on and got bored with later, which was to put ‘I,’ ‘Me,’ or ‘You’ in it so it was very direct and personal. ‘Love Me Do’... ‘Please Please Me’... ‘From Me To You’ (we got two of them in there)”^{1 (148)}. Alan W. Pollack, Beatles musicologist, gave Paul’s casual remark a more serious and logical angle: “I think it would be unfair to under-rate it as a mere exploitational pandering... In ‘From Me To You,’ a particular immediacy is achieved by the use of direct address. How else could this group of four fabulous gentlemen manage, in the midst of a crowded concert hall or across the incorporeal airwaves, to establish such a direct connection to their audience?” John likewise noted, “We think this is very important. The fans like to feel that they are part of something that is being done by the performers”⁷.

The second intention was purely business. John coldly asserted, “We were just writing the next single after ‘She Loves You’”^{3 (168)}.

Concerning the music, both songwriters believed this song flexible. Paul mused, “‘From Me to You’ - it could be done as an old ragtime tune, especially the middle eight”⁸. John said, “It was far bluesier than that when we wrote it. The notes - today you could rearrange it pretty funky”^{3 (168)}. Paul especially liked the “creamy center” of this song. In 1988, he said, “It was great. That middle eight was a great departure for us. Say you're in C, then go to A minor - fairly ordinary - C, change it to G, and then F - pretty ordinary. But then it goes, ‘I got arms,’ and that's a G Minor. Going to G Minor and a C takes you to a whole new world. It was exciting”⁵. To this, he added, “I remember being very pleased with the middle eight because there was a strange chord in it, and it went into a minor... We thought that was a very big step”², and “The thing I liked about ‘From Me To You’ was it had a very complete middle. It went to a surprising place. The opening chord of the middle section of that song heralded a new batch for me. That was a pivotal song - our songwriting lifted a little with that song”¹⁽¹⁴⁹⁾.

As the boys were writing, “Kenny Lynch, who, at this time, fancied himself as a songwriter, sauntered up to the back of the coach and decided he would help John and Paul write a song. After a period of about half an hour had elapsed and nothing seemed to be coming from the back, Kenny rushed to the front of the coach and shouted, ‘Well, that's it. I am not going to write any more of that bloody rubbish with those idiots. They don't know the music from their backsides. That's it! No more help from me!’ The song that John and Paul were writing at this time was a track called ‘From Me To You’”⁹. It has been reported that Lynch stormed off because he heard them incorporate “ooh!” into the song, to which he declared, “You can't do that. You'll sound like a bunch of fucking fairies!”¹⁰. Lynch himself recounted, “I remember John and Paul saying they were thinking of running up to the microphone together and shaking their heads and singing, ‘whoooooooo.’ It later became a very important, terrifically-popular part of their act when they sang ‘She Loves You.’ But, at the time they were planning it, even before the song was written, I remember everybody on the coach fell about laughing. I said, ‘You can't do that. They'll think you're a bunch of poofs.’ I remember John saying to me he thought it sounded great and they were having it in their act”¹¹. John later admitted that “the ‘woo woo’ was taken from the Isley Brothers' ‘Twist and Shout,’ which we stuck into everything – ‘From Me to You,’ ‘She Loves You’ - they all had that ‘woo woo’”^{3 (169)}.

¹ Miles, Many Years From Now, p.148-149

² The Beatles Anthology, p.94

³ Sheff, All We Are Saying, p.168­­­­-169

⁴ Tremlett, The Paul McCartney Story, p.98

⁵ Lewisohn, Recording Sessions, p.10

⁶ Schaffner, The Beatles Forever, p.21

⁷ interview, attributed 1963 (not verified)

⁸ interview with David Frost, May 18, 1964

⁹ Badman, The Beatles Off the Record (2001), quoting Roger Greenaway of the

Kestrels

¹⁰ Turner, A Hard Day’s Write

¹¹ Coleman, John Winston Lennon, p.193

_______________________________________________________________________

"THANK YOU GIRL"

Since we know that “From Me to You” was conceived around the idea of a music publication’s letters column, it’s not far-fetched to believe that “Thank You Girl” was like-minded. In fact, Paul said, “We knew that if we wrote a song called, ‘Thank You Girl’ that a lot of the girls who wrote us fan letters would take it as a genuine ‘thank you.’ So a lot of our songs – ‘From Me to You’ is one of them - were directly addressed to the fans”¹. It is therefore easy to conclude that “Thank You Girl” was composed on the Shapiro bus, perhaps on the same day as “From Me to You.”

Paul accounted, “This was pretty much co-written, but there might have been a slight leaning towards me with the ‘thank you, girl’ thing. It sounds like me, trying to appease the mob”². John basically agreed, “Paul and me”³.

We know the inspiration, and intention, but what did they think of the product? John said, “This was just a silly song we knocked off”³ and “One of our efforts at writing a single that didn't work. So it became a B-side or an album track”⁴. Paul concurred, “These early songs were wonderful to learn by and were good album fillers... A bit of a hack song, but all good practice”².

¹ Lewisohn, Recording Sessions, p.10

² Miles, Many Years From Now, p.149

³ article in Hit Parader, Apr 1972, originally in The Record Mirror, Oct 1971

⁴ Sheff, All We Are Saying, p.169

_______________________________________________________________________

GENERAL REFS: Winn, Way Beyond Compare; Lewisohn, Chronicles; Castleman & Podrazik, All Together Now; Lewisohn, The Beatles Live!

_______________________________________________________________________

Tom Wise
gengar843@msn.com

Although I use quotes from sources, or cited fact, much of the material on this and other pages of my blog is original, from my own pen. This is not cut-and-paste, it is a work of art. Copyright © 2010 Tom Wise.

1963, February 25: Sources: A TASTE OF HONEY

“A TASTE OF HONEY”

Versions. There is only one version.

Foundational Variations. A “Foundational Variation” is any preceding base for a released recording which (with some exceptions) has no extra material. For this song, the true Foundational Variation was Take 5 (the “best” twin-track), which is unavailable. The next Foundational Variation, Take 6, was the first backing vocal overdub, and this is Variation 1.0. The next Foundational Variation, Take 7, was the second and final backing vocal overdub, and this is Variation 2.0. On the released Stereo recording, it is possible to isolate the instruments (with bleed) in or near the Left channel, but this does not constitute a Foundational Variation, only a karaoke opportunity. This is as far back as we can go.

Variations. Since Take 6 is Variation 1.0, and Take 7 is Variation 2.0, we begin in this section with 3.0.

There is only one Mono mix, designated Variation 3.0.

There is only one Stereo mix, but there are two Variations (and at least one “deviation”).

The first Variation, 4.0, is designated to all Stereo releases for “A Taste of Honey” except one.

The second Variation, 4.0.1, is a derivative of 4.0. On The Early Beatles Stereo LP, “A Taste of Honey” has a bit more reverberation than on the Please Please Me album, and earns a new Variation.

Not Variations.

(1) In testing* “A Taste of Honey” on the German Stereo Die Beatles LP, considered to have less processing than all other Stereo Please Please Me pressings (details: here), I heard a tiny (if any!) discrepancy in the reverberation quality on the vocal (Right) channel, but not enough to earn any new Variation.

* I tested using both vinyl (German Please Please Me) and needle-drop FLAC (Die Beatles), performing A-B tests against several other sources, including UK Please Please Me (vinyl and FLAC), Blue Box Please Please Me (vinyl and FLAC), MFSL Please Please Me (vinyl and FLAC), and the 2009 Please Please Me remaster.

(2) Any small differences in Stereo image positioning will not be designated as new Variations, but as deviations. Naturally, judgment has been used to differ between Variation and deviation.

(3) Discrepancies in channel loudness generally do not earn any new Variation.

(4) Concerning the “Mono Fold-Down” (Mono-from-Stereo) track on The Early Beatles Mono LP, it’s interesting from the standpoint that it proves this album to be filled with such fold-downs, but it can be replicated by simply summing to Mono while playing the Stereo track, and therefore earns no new Variation.

_______________________________________________________________________

AUDIO SOURCES

Sonic Ratings. All recommended sources will receive a subjective sonic rating, either Excellent, Very Good, or Good. This subjective rating is based on various factors, including (1) clarity vs. murkiness, (2) smoothness vs. distortion (including harshness) or peaking, (3) balance vs. over-loud elements (for example, too much emphasis on bass), and (4) comparison to other sources under a particular category (for example, Mono). Any source not given a rating of at least Good will at least be provided explanatory notes (including whether or not I’ve heard that source).

Price Tags. Vinyl sources will include an estimated 2011 price tag in US dollars, taken mainly from completed eBay auctions.

Terminology. "Analog" refers only to vinyl. No tapes were tested.

_______________________________________________________________________

MONO

Imbalance. “A Taste of Honey” in Mono has mastering imbalances of several varieties, differing from source to source. In cases where I was able to test for such imbalance, I provide details.

Terminology. "FLAC signature" and "Channel Duplication Solution" are terms under the subject of imbalance, discussed: here.

Clunk. About four seconds after the final chord is struck on guitar, there is a sound approximately like a bottle hitting another object. This is clearly audible in Stereo and barely (if at all) in Mono. It was removed from the 2009 Mono and Stereo Remasters.

End of Song. “A Taste of Honey” Mono fades about the same on each source, the 2009 Mono Remaster perhaps a trifle longer.

Note that Dr. Ebbetts’ Please Please Me FLAC ended with a couple of squeaks (tape capstan?) after the fade. This is not repeated on any other source.

VARIATION 1.0: ANALOG

UK LP Please Please Me (1963) - Mono

$20-1000.

General. Details for various incarnations of this album are: here.

My Sources:

Dr. Ebbetts needle-drop FLAC.

Imbalance. Ebbetts FLAC hiss: link.

Sonic Rating. GOOD. Good: Vocals in front, drum-guitar nicely behind. Bad: Typically bright and peaky, with vocals a bit low and thin bass.

Pbthal needle-drop FLAC.

Imbalance. FLAC signature.

Sonic Rating. GOOD. Good: Very close to Ebbetts except the guitar is a little more aggressive than the drums here. Bad: Kind of bulgy in the highs, and still a meager bass.

Millennium Remasters Red Wax Japan LP needle-drop 320 kbps mp3.

Imbalance. Millennium Remasters mp3 signature: link.

Sonic Rating. GOOD. Good: Vocals and guitar fight it out for superiority, drums and bass fending for leftovers. Bad: Squashed and molded, the vocals a tad lost.

Pbthal Red Wax Japan LP (Toshiba EAS-70130) needle-drop FLAC.

Imbalance. FLAC signature.

Sonic Rating. GOOD. Good: About the same as Millennium Remasters. Bad: I think the bass is little less prominent here.

US LP Introducing the Beatles, et. al. (1963) - Mono

$100+ (Introducing the Beatles, if genuine)

General. I did not test “A Taste of Honey” on any other Vee-Jay album, but I assume they use the same master as Introducing the Beatles.

My Sources: (1) Vinyl. (2) Dr. Ebbetts’ needle-drop FLAC.

Imbalance. Vinyl, no. Dr. Ebbetts, none.

Sonic Rating. Vinyl, VERY GOOD. Good: Fuller. Bad: Dynamics a tad cramped.

Ebbetts, a disappointment as it concerns the high end.

UK EP Twist and Shout (1963)

$5-50, the lower price for the reissue from the vinyl box set

General. This (Parlophone GEP 8882) is also part of The Beatles EP Collection 1981 vinyl box set.

My Source: Vinyl box set, “-1N” lacquer.

Imbalance. Untested.

Sonic Rating. Drums make a move, but it’s peaky and a little bright. It’s just trying too hard.

Mono, Analog, Notes

(1) The Mexican EP (EPEM 10039) is about the same as any other bright source, but it’s greatly imbalanced as well.

VARIATION 1.0: DIGITAL

CD Please Please Me (1987)

My Source. CD.

Imbalance. link.

Sonic Rating. GOOD. Good: Looks and sounds much like Ebbetts. Bad: Bright vocal, weak bass.

CD EP Twist and Shout (1992)

General. This is from the CD EP box set, although it can also be found at auction as a separate CD.

My Source. CD box set. Note. Dr. Ebbetts' UK EP Collection (2000 edition) used the CD EP, not vinyl, for this track (checked with Audacity).

Imbalance. None: link.

Sonic Rating. EXCELLENT. Good: A little bolder than most, with some mighty aggressive lows which shine on the growling rhythm guitar, also apparent on bass. Good blend. Bad: Spectral analysis doesn’t show much difference from the LP (but hearing is believing).

CD Please Please Me - Remaster (2009) - Mono

My Source. FLAC.

Imbalance. FLAC signature. Spectrum analysis of WAV file from CD showed same characteristics as FLAC signature.

Sonic Rating. VERY GOOD. Good: Guitar is the winner, but moderate bass floats well. Fairly delightful. Bad: Slight peaking.

_______________________________________________________________________

STEREO

Mix Information. The takes were recorded as twin-tracks, two tracks recorded simultaneously, instruments to one side, vocals to the other. For Stereo mixing, the instrumental side of the twin-track (“I” in the diagram below) was sent hard (wide) to the Left channel, while vocals (“V” in the diagram below) were sent hard to the Right channel. Rhythm guitar (“R” in the diagram below) bleeds into the Right channel, causing it to seem Left-Center. It sounds approximately thus:

Left _I___R_____________V_ Right

Stereo Image Deviations. There is at least one deviation known which I think does not approach the status of Variation:

(1) The Beatles Box (“crate”), approximately thus:

Left __I__R__________V____ Right

Relative Channel Loudness. Rather than comparative descriptions, I will be assigning a number (from 1 to 10) for each channel, subjectively measuring the amplitude. For digital media, this is based on the waveform in Audacity. For analog media, this is based on channel LED indicators. Note that numbers assigned to analog media do not correlate to digital media. Neither are the numbers perfect, but are approximations. The reader is advised to run similar tests, and make necessary correlations, according to the gear.

Relative Channel Loudness is the relation of the Left channel to the Right channel. Each source has its own recipe, affecting the listening experience, especially under headphones. This differs from overall loudness; whereas the former may cause a desire to rebalance the channels (by whatever method), the latter (which I will call “gain”) motivates to adjust the volume knob.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. The deviations to Wide Stereo are limited, those deviations being (1) channel placement (see “Mix Information” above), (2) relative channel loudness (already covered), and (3) equalization. Due to this minimalism, I decided to listen in Mono to determine the sonic rating (this also satisfied any curiosity concerning “how it would sound”). When I double-checked my findings in Stereo, I was pleased that they matched.

Fake-Outs. There is at least one digital production for “A Taste of Honey” in Stereo which is not the same as its vinyl counterparts, and I consider it to be an intentional fake: (1) a particular circulating mp3 for The Beatles Box (“crate”).

End of Song. About the same as Mono.

VARIATION 2.0

UK LP Please Please Me (1963) - Stereo

$50-24,000

General. Details for various incarnations of this album are: here.

My Sources:

UK LP, Two-box label, "-1" lacquer.

My Sources: (1) Vinyl, “2” mother, deep stamper (9th label, ca. 1970). (2) Pbthal “Tube Cut” needle-drop FLAC.

Relative Channel Loudness. Vinyl, Left 2, Right 3. FLAC, Left 2, Right 4.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. Vinyl, VERY GOOD. Good: It’s a nice blend. Bad: It’s not perfect, missing some air, especially on the vocals.

Pbthal, GOOD. Good: Close to the vinyl. Bad: A hair thinner, just enough to drop the rating.

UK LP from The Beatles Collection ("Blue Box"), "-2" lacquer.

My Sources: (1) Vinyl. (2) Dr. Ebbetts’ needle-drop FLAC.

Relative Channel Loudness. Vinyl, Left 1, Right 2. FLAC, Left 5, Right 5.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. Vinyl, VERY GOOD. Good: Similar to the first lacquer, with a little more bass. Bad: Vocals again the culprit, being slightly hidden.

Ebbetts, GOOD. Good: Close to the vinyl, but drums a little more aggressive. Bad: Padded, probably due to adjusted channel loudness, noticeable in the erratic Stereo image.

US LP Introducing the Beatles (1963) – Stereo

$ expensive !

General: Vee-Jay album, catalog SR-1062.

My Source: Dr. Ebbetts needle-drop FLAC.

Relative Channel Loudness. Left 4, Right 6.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. VERY GOOD. Good: The drums are ahead of the vocals, which would cause you to think it bright, but the bass keeps pace. Very clear. Bad: Hey, the vocals are not quite there.

German LP Die Beatles, or Please Please Me (1966-1977) - Stereo

$ 20-100

General. There is no perceivable difference in reverberation for “A Taste of Honey” 4.0 here compared to other sources. Details on the German sources for “A Taste of Honey” 4.0 are: here.

My Sources: (1) Vinyl, German Please Please Me (Apple Electrola 1C 062-04219), lacquer “SHZE-117-A2/-B2.” (2) Pbthal Die Beatles needle-drop FLAC. (3) Dr. Ebbetts was used to verify testing.

Relative Channel Loudness. Vinyl, Left 1.5, Right 2. FLAC, Left 3, Right 4.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. Vinyl, VERY GOOD. Good. Drums and guitar that fight with each other but not with the sweet vocal mix. Bad. Bass frequencies suffer, but not enough to squish it.

Pbthal, VERY GOOD. Good. Not really comparable to the vinyl, but a better master than pbthal’s Tube-Cut FLAC. Bad. Still thin at the bass level.

Japan (MFSL) LP Please Please Me (1986)

$50 up

General. This release (MFSL 1-101) was also part of a box set (the “Black Box”).

My Sources: (1) Vinyl, from The Black Box. (2) Dr. Ebbetts needle-drop FLAC.

Note that Dr. Ebbetts’ 2008 Upgrade was a remaster, not a needle-drop. I deal with this appropriately.

Relative Channel Loudness. Vinyl, Left 1, Right 2. FLAC, Left 6, Right 6.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. Vinyl, EXCELLENT. Good: Very nice blend of the instrumental track mixed with a superior vocal mix. Bad: Not much.

Ebbetts, VERY GOOD. Good: Warm. Bad: Close but no cigar, drums a little overpowering.

Dr. Ebbetts 2008 Upgrade. Sibilant and bright.

UK 8-LP The Beatles Box (1980)

$50 or so (a bargain!)

General. This is “The Crate” (its nickname), issued by World Records (SM 701/8), EMI’s mail order division.

My Source. UK Vinyl, first lacquer, cut by Harry T. Moss.

Relative Channel Loudness. Left 1, Right 2.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. VERY GOOD. Good: Deviation in Stereo image provides a different perspective in EQ, with guitar and drums before vocal. Bad: Though Stereo sound was superior, Mono summing was mediocre. Bass light.

Fake-out. A certain circulating mp3 has the channels reversed.

Variation 2.0 Analog, Notes

(1) The Millennium Remasters red wax runs fast and is very bright.

VARIATION 2.0: DIGITAL

CD Please Please Me - Remaster (2009) – Stereo

My Source. FLAC.

Relative Channel Loudness. Left 7, Right 6.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. VERY GOOD. Good. Drums and vocal are the leaders, guitar and bass hooking up on the back end. Bad. A bit loud.

VARIATION 2.0: BOOTLEG

Fabulous Sound Labs HDCD Please Please Me

My Source: 320 kbps mp3.

Relative Channel Loudness. Left 8, Right 9.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. Some sibilance and somewhat loud.

VARIATION 2.0.1

General. This Variation adds some reverberation.

US LP The Early Beatles (1965) – Stereo

$5-10

General: Capitol album, catalog ST-2309. It’s the familiar “American” sound, if you will.

My Sources: (1) Vinyl (orange label; also, Apple label). (2) Dr. Ebbetts needle-drop FLAC. (3) The Capitol Versions Vol. 2 FLAC (since this is actually digital, I cheated here).

Relative Channel Loudness. Vinyl, Left 1.5, Right 2. Ebbetts, Left 8, Right 8. The Capitol Versions, even louder than Ebbetts (disqualified from further testing). I am not convinced that Ebbetts did not use the Capitol Versions CD as his foundation.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. Vinyl, VERY GOOD. Good. Above average, with slight cave sound on the vocal-drum focus. Bad. Vocals a bit muddied by the reverb.

Ebbetts, very loud.

OUTFAKE

General. An "outfake" is a fan-created mix or recording.

Bootleg, Dr. Ebbetts' Please Please Me "Stereo Remix"

Dr. Ebbetts worked a “Stereo Remix” (details: here), with heavy instrumentation Left (“I” in the diagram below), vocals Center (“V” in the diagram below), light (actually, more like bleed) instrumentation Right (“R” in the diagram below), approximately thus:

Left _I________V________ Right

This is not bad at all.

Naturally, being unauthorized, this is not a Variation.

_______________________________________________________________________

MONO FOLD-DOWN: ANALOG & DIGITAL

The 1965 Mono LP The Early Beatles (Capitol T 2309) used a Mono-from-Stereo fold-down, as did the 2006 CD set, The Capitol Albums, Volume 2. This “mix” is not collectible nor a Variation, as you can “make” it yourself by pushing the “Mono” button on your amplifier. For a few more details on the original album, go: here.

______________________________________________________________________

VIDEO SOURCES

None.

_______________________________________________________________________

Tom Wise
gengar843@msn.com

Although I use quotes from sources, or cited fact, much of the material on this and other pages of my blog is original, from my own pen. This is not cut-and-paste, it is a work of art. Copyright © 2011 Tom Wise.

1963, February 25: Sources: MISERY

“MISERY”

Versions. There is only one version.

Foundational Variations. A “Foundational Variation” is any preceding base for a released recording which (with some exceptions) has no extra material. For this song, the true Foundational Variation, 1.0, is Take 11 (the “best” twin-track), which is not available. The next Foundational Variation, 2.0, is Take 16 (1.0+ piano dub), also unavailable.

Variations. Since Take 11 is Variation 1.0, and Take 16 is Variation 2.0, we begin in this section with 3.0.

There are ostensibly two Mono mixes, described here.

The first Mono mix, designated Variation 3.0, is “UK Mono” (“Mono 5”), found on all releases except Vee-Jay.

The second Mono mix, designated Variation 4.0, is “US Mono” (“Mono 6”), found on Vee-Jay releases.

There is only one Stereo mix, designated Variation 5.0 (and at least one “deviation”).

Not Variations.

(1) In testing* “Misery” on the German Stereo Die Beatles LP, considered to have less processing than all other Stereo Please Please Me pressings (details: here), I heard a tiny (if any!) discrepancy in the reverberation quality on the vocal (Right) channel, but not enough to earn any new Variation.

* I tested using both vinyl (German Please Please Me) and needle-drop FLAC (Die Beatles), performing A-B tests against several other sources, including UK Please Please Me (vinyl and FLAC), Blue Box Please Please Me (vinyl and FLAC), MFSL Please Please Me (vinyl and FLAC), and the 2009 Please Please Me remaster.

(2) Any small differences in Stereo image positioning will not be designated as new Variations, but as deviations. Naturally, judgment has been used to differ between Variation and deviation.

(3) Discrepancies in channel loudness generally do not earn any new Variation.

Intentional Sibilance. This song is famous for deliberate slurring of the “S” sound (“shend her back to me”) at about 1:22 into the song.

The reason for the slurring subsists in several theories, but the likeliest is Beatles humor.

_______________________________________________________________________

AUDIO SOURCES

Sonic Ratings. All recommended sources will receive a subjective sonic rating, either Excellent, Very Good, or Good. This subjective rating is based on various factors, including (1) clarity vs. murkiness, (2) smoothness vs. distortion (including harshness) or peaking, (3) balance vs. over-loud elements (for example, too much emphasis on bass), and (4) comparison to other sources under a particular category (for example, Mono). Any source not given a rating of at least Good will at least be provided explanatory notes (including whether or not I’ve heard that source).

Price Tags. Vinyl sources will include an estimated 2011 price tag in US dollars, taken mainly from completed eBay auctions.

Terminology. "Analog" refers only to vinyl. No tapes were tested.

_______________________________________________________________________

MONO

Imbalance. “Misery” in Mono has mastering imbalances of several varieties, differing from source to source. In cases where I was able to test for such imbalance, I provide details.

Terminology. "FLAC signature" and "Channel Duplication Solution" are terms under the subject of imbalance, discussed: here.

End of Song. The song ends with a coda, John and Paul singing “misery” followed by various ad-lib responses. After the fourth “misery” comes “la-la...” followed by a crash of some type (since we haven’t the twin-tracks, the sound is unidentifiable, but it could be a cymbal). This is heard on nearly all Mono releases, boldest I think on pbthal red wax FLAC.

VARIATION 3.0: ANALOG

UK LP Please Please Me (1963) - Mono

$20-1000.

General. Details for various incarnations of this album are: here.

My Sources:

Dr. Ebbetts needle-drop FLAC.

Imbalance. Ebbetts FLAC hiss: link.

Sonic Rating. Unimpressive. Sharp, even screechy, with some sibilance. Ends one “la” short.

Pbthal needle-drop FLAC.

Imbalance. FLAC signature.

Sonic Rating. VERY GOOD. Good: Richer, not unpleasant feel, with a vocal-drum attack and balanced second layer. Bad: Sometimes feels muffled.

Millennium Remasters Red Wax Japan LP needle-drop 320 kbps mp3.

Imbalance. Millennium Remasters mp3 signature: link.

Sonic Rating. VERY GOOD. Good: Darker is better, reigning in the piano and accentuating the bass. Bad: A bit dull.

Pbthal Red Wax Japan LP (Toshiba EAS-70130) needle-drop FLAC.

Imbalance. FLAC signature.

Sonic Rating. EXCELLENT. Good: Spectrum analysis shows less highs than Millennium Remasters, and a reduced low hum area. This neat trick makes the bass airy. Pretty bold. Bad: Not much.

UK EP The Beatles' No. 1 (1963)

$5-50, the lower price for the reissue from the vinyl box set

General. This (Parlophone GEP 8883) is also part of The Beatles EP Collection 1981 vinyl box set.

My Sources: (1) Vinyl box set, “-1N” lacquer. (2) pbthal FLAC.

Imbalance. Vinyl, untested. Pbthal, FLAC signature.

The CDEP is reportedly remastered differently (see below).

Sonic Rating. Vinyl, EXCELLENT. Good: Terrifically blended bass, drums, and guitar, with the vocal out front and piano nicely positioned. Great vocal mix. Bad: Not much.

Pbthal, for the fourth time, looks and sounds like a slightly-louder version of pbthal red wax album FLAC (see also pbthal EP FLAC remarks for “Anna,” “Chains” and “I Saw Her Standing There”). That’s not bad at all.

Mono, Analog, Notes

(1) The Mexican EP (EPEM 10039) is bright and imbalanced, enough to reject it.

VARIATION 3.0: DIGITAL

CD Please Please Me (1987)

My Source. CD.

Imbalance. link.

Sonic Rating. Irritating. Bass plugs along, but peaky and distorted vocals, erratic drums, and mostly hidden guitar.

CD EP The Beatles No. 1 (1992)

General. This is from the CD EP box set, although it can also be found at auction as a separate CD.

My Source. CD box set. Note. Dr. Ebbetts' UK EP Collection (2000 edition) used the CD EP, not vinyl, for this track (checked with Audacity).

Imbalance. None: link.

Sonic Rating. GOOD. Good: Kind of bouncy from emphasis on low frequencies. Decent blend. Bad: A bit loud, even distorted at times. Lows muddy here and there.

CD Please Please Me - Remaster (2009) - Mono

My Source. FLAC.

Imbalance. FLAC signature. Spectrum analysis of WAV file from CD showed same characteristics as FLAC signature.

Sonic Rating. VERY GOOD. Good: Full and balanced. Spectrum analysis reveals modified lows from the CD EP (good), and it comes across as a louder version of pbthal red wax FLAC (good). Bad: A tad sibilant, the consequence of perfecting the blend.

VARIATION 4.0

US LP Introducing the Beatles, et. al. (1963) - Mono

$100+ (Introducing the Beatles, if genuine)

General. I did not test “Misery” on any other Vee-Jay album, but I assume they use the same master as Introducing the Beatles.

My Sources: (1) Vinyl. (2) Dr. Ebbetts’ needle-drop FLAC. (3) Every Little Thing Vol. 3 bootleg 256 kbps mp3.

Imbalance. Vinyl, no. Dr. Ebbetts, none. ELT3, none.

Sonic Rating. Vinyl, VERY GOOD. Good: Extra mids, and gained up a bit, for a super-clean vocal. Thinner, but enjoyable. Bad: Bass frequencies require knob-fiddling.

Ebbetts, VERY GOOD. Good: Very close to the vinyl, with a perhaps a tad more bass. Bad: Still thinner.

ELT3, GOOD. Good: Interesting, in that it sounds like the Vee-Jay vinyl but, under spectrum analysis, looks almost exactly as the 2009 Mono Remaster (or perhaps the CD EP). Bad: Besides the anomaly, the coda ends abruptly after three repeats, rather than going into the fourth.

_______________________________________________________________________

STEREO

The takes were recorded as twin-tracks, two tracks recorded simultaneously. For Stereo mixing, bass, drums and George’s guitar, along with harmonica overdubs, were sent hard (wide) to the Left channel, while vocals, John’s rhythm guitar (whether it be acoustic or electric), and piano overdubs were sent hard to the Right channel. There is nothing (except bleed and occasional echo) Center, approximately thus (“I” = instrumental track, “V” = vocals/rhythm guitar/piano track):

Left _I_________________V_ Right

Stereo Image Deviations. There are at least two deviations known which I think do not approach the status of Variation:

(1) The Beatles Box (“crate”), approximately thus:

Left ___I____________V____ Right

(2) Although it could be an aural illusion (on both the vinyl and Ebbetts FLAC), Please Please Me second lacquer (“Blue Box”) is approximately thus:

Left _I_______________V___ Right

Relative Channel Loudness. Relative Channel Loudness is the relation of the Left channel to the Right channel. Each source has its own recipe, affecting the listening experience, especially under headphones. This differs from overall loudness; whereas the former may cause a desire to rebalance the channels (by whatever method), the latter (which I will call “gain”) motivates to adjust the volume knob.

I will be assigning a number (from 1 to 10) for each channel, subjectively measuring the amplitude. For digital media, this is based on the waveform in Audacity. For analog media, this is based on channel LED indicators. Note that numbers assigned to analog media do not correlate to digital media. Neither are the numbers perfect, but are approximations. The reader is advised to run similar tests, and make necessary correlations, according to the gear.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. The deviations to Wide Stereo are limited, those deviations being (1) channel placement (see “Mix Information” above), (2) relative channel loudness (already covered), and (3) equalization. Due to this minimalism, I decided to listen in Mono to determine the sonic rating (this also satisfied any curiosity concerning “how it would sound”). When I double-checked my findings in Stereo, I was pleased that they matched.

Fake-Outs. There is at least one digital production for “Misery” in Stereo which is not the same as its vinyl counterpart, and I consider it to be an intentional fake: (1) a particular circulating mp3 for The Beatles Box (“crate”).

End of Song. Same description as Mono, the boldest example being I think on the HDCD track.

VARIATION 5.0

UK LP Please Please Me (1963) - Stereo

$50-24,000

General. Details for various incarnations of this album are: here.

My Sources:

UK LP, Two-box label, "-1" lacquer.

My Sources: (1) Vinyl, “2” mother, deep stamper (9th label, ca. 1970). (2) Pbthal “Tube Cut” needle-drop FLAC.

Relative Channel Loudness. Vinyl, Left 2, Right 3. FLAC, Left 3, Right 6.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. Vinyl, VERY GOOD. Good: EQ doesn’t seem like much at first, but ends up producing a nice vocal mix with good instrumental separation. Complete ending. Bad: Bit of distortion.

Pbthal, GOOD. Good: Breezy and light. Bad: The ending contains FLAC transfer issues, not anomalous.

UK LP from The Beatles Collection ("Blue Box"), "-2" lacquer.

My Sources: (1) Vinyl. (2) Dr. Ebbetts’ needle-drop FLAC.

Relative Channel Loudness. Vinyl, Left 1.5, Right 2. FLAC, Left 6, Right 7.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. Vinyl, GOOD. Good: A little more bass here than on the first lacquer. Bad: Vocal mix not as clear. Ending one “la” short.

Ebbetts, GOOD. Good: Like the vinyl. Bad: Like the vinyl.

US LP Introducing the Beatles (1963) – Stereo

$ expensive !

General: Vee-Jay album, catalog SR-1062.

My Source: Dr. Ebbetts needle-drop FLAC.

Relative Channel Loudness. Left 5, Right 7.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. Kind of muffled. Incomplete end.

German LP Die Beatles, or Please Please Me (1966-1977) - Stereo

$ 20-100

General. There is no perceivable difference in reverberation for “Misery” 5.0 here compared to other sources. Details on the German sources for “Misery” 5.0 are: here.

My Sources: (1) Vinyl, German Please Please Me (Apple Electrola 1C 062-04219), lacquer “SHZE-117-A2/-B2.” (2) Pbthal Die Beatles needle-drop FLAC. (3) Dr. Ebbetts was used to verify testing.

Relative Channel Loudness. Vinyl, Left 2, Right 3. FLAC, Left 4, Right 7.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. Vinyl, VERY GOOD. Good. To my ears, a perfect blend, especially drums and guitar. Bad. Bit of distortion. Ending one “la” short.

Pbthal, GOOD. Good. Clean. Instrumental blend similar to vinyl. Bad. Lower vocal.

US LP Rarities (1980)

$5-10

General. Brennan reported of this source (Capitol SHAL-12060), “In the remix, the Left instrumental channel is relatively louder, which isn't bad, but reverb has been added too, especially in the intro vocal.” Concerning the vinyl (and authentic needle-drops), I find such changes to be very slight, even absent, earning no new Variation.

My sources. (1) Vinyl. (2) Dr Ebbetts needle-drop FLAC. (3) All Together Now bootleg FLAC. (4) Every Little Thing Vol. 3 bootleg FLAC.

Relative Channel Loudness. (1) Vinyl, Left 1.75, Right 2. (2) Ebbetts, Left 6 Right 5. (3) All Together Now, Left 8, Right 7. (4) ELT3, Left 7, Right 7.

Sonic Rating. Vinyl, VERY GOOD. Good: Nice vocal mix, backed by heavier bass & drum focus. Bad: Ending one “la” short.

Ebbetts, seems inauthentic, more like MFSL in blend, even including MFSL buzz during the final moments.

All Together Now, just a louder version of Ebbetts, evident from the buzz.

ELT3, GOOD. Good: Adequate. Bad: Somewhat dull.

UK 8-LP The Beatles Box (1980)

$50 or so (a bargain!)

General. This is “The Crate” (its nickname), issued by World Records (SM 701/8), EMI’s mail order division.

My Source. UK Vinyl, first lacquer, cut by Harry T. Moss.

Relative Channel Loudness. Left 2, Right 2.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. EXCELLENT. Good: Bass filters through a vocal and drum focus, those elements trading center stage. Good vocal mix. Complete ending. Bad: Not much.

Fake-out. A certain circulating mp3 has the channels reversed.

Japan (MFSL) LP Please Please Me (1986)

$50 up

General. This release (MFSL 1-101) was also part of a box set (the “Black Box”).

My Sources: (1) Vinyl, from The Black Box. (2) Dr. Ebbetts needle-drop FLAC.

Note that Dr. Ebbetts’ 2008 Upgrade was a remaster, not a needle-drop. I deal with this appropriately.

Relative Channel Loudness. Vinyl, Left 1.5, Right 1.75. FLAC, Left 8, Right 6.5.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. Vinyl, VERY GOOD. Good: Nice instrumental section, with soothing balance. Nearly-great vocal mix. Bad: Buzz in final moments and after the track.

Ebbetts, GOOD. Good: Drum-vocal focus, with more than adequate bass. Good vocal mix. Bad: Boomy and doomy. Some distortion on Left (instrumental) channel.

Dr. Ebbetts 2008 Upgrade. Overbearing, with a bit of sibilance. Clicks and buzz.

VARIATION 5.0: DIGITAL

CD Please Please Me - Remaster (2009) – Stereo

My Source. FLAC.

Relative Channel Loudness. Left 8, Right 9.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. GOOD. Good. Drum and vocal focus. Nice insistent bass. Bad. Loud (though not distorted or peaky), giving the impression of trying to do too much. The ending is incomplete, fading on the first “la” to avoid the crashing noise!

VARIATION 5.0: BOOTLEG

Fabulous Sound Labs HDCD Please Please Me

My Source: 320 kbps mp3.

Relative Channel Loudness. Left 7, Right 7.

Sonic Rating by Mono Summing. Not overly loud, but bright with sibilance.

OUTFAKE

General. An "outfake" is a fan-created mix or recording.

Bootleg, Dr. Ebbetts' Please Please Me "Stereo Remix"

Dr. Ebbetts worked a “Stereo Remix” (details: here), with vocals Center (“V” in the diagram below), instrumentation Left and Right (“I” in the diagram below), piano Right (“P” in the diagram below), approximately thus:

Left _I________V_______I+P_ Right

There are two shortfalls to this remix: (1) the vocal wanders a bit, (2) the MFSL buzz is evident at the end.

Naturally, being unauthorized, this is not a Variation.

______________________________________________________________________

VIDEO SOURCES

CARTOON

The Beatles cartoon series, Episode 4, includes an animated sing-a-long, with mostly symbolic animation (a few frames of Ringo as Yorick). However, the song has been edited to loop, and is furthermore missing the opening arpeggio, making it not a suitable "music video" experience.

"Misery" was also utilized for an animated segment in The Beatles cartoon series, Episode 5. In this, The Beatles are chased by Dracula before turning the tables. However, there is a long interruption in the middle of the song, and also too many cartoon voice overdubs, making it not a suitable "music video" experience.

_______________________________________________________________________

Tom Wise
gengar843@msn.com

Although I use quotes from sources, or cited fact, much of the material on this and other pages of my blog is original, from my own pen. This is not cut-and-paste, it is a work of art. Copyright © 2011 Tom Wise.