The Beatles (1 Viewer)

[Bob Magaw]

Has anybody heard the remixed Pepper??

I got it last Friday.  Got the big box because...well, I'm a nut.  The box is very well done, but I can't help but think I would have been just as happy with the 2 CD set, but I guess some people collect video games, I collect Beatles.  Anyway I've gotten through it in the last 6 days.

Packaging is real nice.  LOVE the full size album cover that houses all the discs.  I had forgotten how much detail was on that cover.  Stared at it for hours.  People who weren't alive during the LP error have no clue how much better it is to have a large cover.  The book is great.  Lots of detail.  Cool poster and cutouts.  It's all stored in a heavy duty box with a 3D cover which is also kind of cool.

As far as the music, I love all the outtakes.  Within You Without You is awesome instrumental.  I actually love all the instrumentals.  The different takes of Strawberry Fields is cool too.  Had heard some of it, but not all.  I love that they included the mono version of Pepper in the box.  That's cool.  The Documentary was also well done. Cool that they got George's thoughts before he died.  I personally hadn't seen this documentary, but apparently it's been around for awhile.  The 5.1 Mixes are a cool thing, but I probably won't listen to them too much.

Which brings us to the real star of the show, the 2017 Remix.  For those that don't know, in 1967 Mono was really still the standard.  Stereo was in it's infancy.  The Beatles weren't even in attendance for the stereo mix, so all the stuff they wanted in was in the mono.  If you listen to the two back to back, you will notice several differences between stereo and mono.  Different sounds and different effects and even one song in a different key.  Most people have only heard the stereo, but the stereo mix was very much of it's time.  Vocals mixed to one side in some cases.  Weird things moving across the stereo landscape.  For sure, a song like A Day In The Life was much better in stereo, but the rockers like Good Morning Good Morning and Sgt Pepper Reprise sounded punchier in mono.

So Giles Martin, son of George Martin decides to go back to the mono tapes and kind of peel back the layers and try and do a more modern stereo mix.  Giles said he was looking for "3D Mono."  He wanted to have the in your face aspects of the mono with the space that stereo allows for.

IMO, he succeeded.  First thing, lots of the mono only sounds you hear are on the new mix.  The warbling of John's voice on Lucy In The Sky with Diamonds.  The extra crowd noises and Paul's yelling at the end of Sgt Pepper Reprise.  She's Leaving Home is sped up here, in the same key as the mono.  The transition between Good Morning Good Morning and Sgt Pepper Reprise is also a bit smoother like the mono.  Second, everything seems punchier.  The raunchiness of the guitars on the opening track jumps out of the speakers.  The bass and drums sound very heavy on the entire record.  Everything seems to be more audible, yet also raunchier.  Third, the moments where the stereo should shine like A Day In The Life are unreal.

So, to wrap up, this mix of Pepper is the one that I will listen to going forward.  I would suggest getting it.  If this much care will be taken with remixing the Beatles stereo catalogue, I would be all for it.  Several albums could use this treatment.  Help, Rubber Soul, and Revolver for starters.  Maybe the White Album too.

I'll add more thoughts on the sound, differences, content and packaging after spending more time listening/looking, I've listened to everything at least once but haven't read much of the book yet, it is beautiful and fairly substantial.

My overwhelming overall impression, and this includes my favorite Miles Davis and Pink Floyd box sets, is this is instantly one of the best of it's kind in my entire collection.

I would have bought anyway, but was especially looking forward to the newly re-mixed/mastered (I assume most of those who care know the difference) 5.1 surround version by George's son Giles. Probably listened to 3-4 X at least. I thought the rear channels were low/imbalanced, but maybe intended more for understated ambience, OR a system issue? Any feedback on the latter appreciated. I need to spend more time with the new STEREO remix, as well as the multi-track elements in general and mono content specifically.

Today is the 50 Year Anniversary of the release of SPLHCB to the day. The Capitol Records building raised a flag at exactly 9:09 AM (nod to Lennon?) and tonight the building will be bathed in light the color of their four individual "uniforms".

* Thanks again to saintsfans, eternally grateful for and indebted to the 96-97% of my Beatles knowledge which he was the source of.

You reminded me, I would love for my two favorite Beatles albums to get this deluxe, expanded treatment - Rubber Soul and (ESPECIALLY) Revolver.

 

[saintsfan]

I'll add more thoughts on the sound, differences, content and packaging after spending more time listening/looking, I've listened to everything at least once but haven't read much of the book yet, it is beautiful and fairly substantial.

My overwhelming overall impression, and this includes my favorite Miles Davis and Pink Floyd box sets, is this is instantly one of the best of it's kind in my entire collection.

I would have bought anyway, but was especially looking forward to the newly re-mixed/mastered (I assume most of those who care know the difference) 5.1 surround version by George's son Giles. Probably listened to 3-4 X at least. I thought the rear channels were low/imbalanced, but maybe intended more for understated ambience, OR a system issue? Any feedback on the latter appreciated. I need to spend more time with the new STEREO remix, as well as the multi-track elements in general and mono content specifically.

Today is the 50 Year Anniversary of the release of SPLHCB to the day. The Capitol Records building raised a flag at exactly 9:09 AM (nod to Lennon?) and tonight the building will be bathed in light the color of their four individual "uniforms".

* Thanks again to saintsfans, eternally grateful for and indebted to the 96-97% of my Beatles knowledge which he was the source of.

You reminded me, I would love for my two favorite Beatles albums to get this deluxe, expanded treatment - Rubber Soul and (ESPECIALLY) Revolver.

My impression of the 5.1 is the same.  For a movie, I think surround sound is great.  For music, just my opinion and for lack of a better term, there are too many "holes" in the sound.  I find a very good stereo mix far more effective for music.  Or maybe I just haven't heard it done really well for music.

You know what I mean??

BTW, thanks for the kind words at the end of your post Bob Magaw.  The Beatles have been a passion of mine virtually my entire life...certainly since I was about 12.  

 

[Godsbrother]

I am certainly going to buy the 2 disc version and seriously considering the full blown 4-disc set.    One true genius of the Beatles is the way they can continually get me to cough up my hard earned money for music that I already own in multiple formats.   I mean I have an original Pepper LP from the 60s, repurchased again in the late 70s cause the 60s LP was beat, then I bought a picture LP when that was the craze in the late 70s, then I bought the Beatles LP collection in 1980, then I bought the CDs when they came out in the late 80s, then I got it again in the remastered Apple USB a few years back.

By my count I have the Sgt Pepper LP in 6* different legit releases (not counting bootlegs)...  and here I go buying it again.

 

[saintsfan]

I am certainly going to buy the 2 disc version and seriously considering the full blown 4-disc set.    Once true genius of the Beatles is they way they can continually get me to cough up my hard earned money for music that I already own in multiple formats.   I mean I have an original Pepper LP from the 60s, repurchased again in the late 70s cause the 60s LP was beat, then I bought a picture LP when that was the craze in the late 70s, then I bought the Beatles LP collection in 1980, then I bought the CDs when they came out in the late 80s, then I got it again in the remastered Apple USB a few years back.

By my count I have the Sgt Pepper LP in 6* different legit releases (not counting bootlegs)...  and here I go buying it again.

I haven't bought it that many times...but I have several times as well

 

[Godsbrother]

My impression of the 5.1 is the same.  For a movie, I think surround sound is great.  For music, just my opinion and for lack of a better term, there are too many "holes" in the sound.  I find a very good stereo mix far more effective for music.  Or maybe I just haven't heard it done really well for music.

I think it is better for movies because we are used to hearing everyday sounds in 360 so it is appropriate.    When you hear music live you typically hear it performed in front of you.   I guess if we went to concerts and the audience was placed in the center and the musicians were all around us it would be more natural.  This is just a guess though, I could be wrong.   It might be cool to have an auditorium like that though!

 

[saintsfan]

I think it is better for movies because we are used to hearing everyday sounds in 360 so it is appropriate.    When you hear music live you typically hear it performed in front of you.   I guess if we went to concerts and the audience was placed in the center and the musicians were all around us it would be more natural.  This is just a guess though, I could be wrong.   It might be cool to have an auditorium like that though!

If somebody actually recorded something for 5.1 it might sound better, but everything I've heard is something recorded for stereo that they try and make 5.1 and it just sounds weak to me

 

[Uruk-Hai]

PBS has a doc airing this Saturday at 8 p.m. about SPLHCB. I have no idea if it's new or not.

 

[saintsfan]

PBS has a doc airing this Saturday at 8 p.m. about SPLHCB. I have no idea if it's new or not.

Thanks bro.  Just hit record on my DVR...

 

[Godsbrother]

If somebody actually recorded something for 5.1 it might sound better, but everything I've heard is something recorded for stereo that they try and make 5.1 and it just sounds weak to me

Maybe but I would think if you have access to the master tapes you could do the same.   I just think it is odd auditory experience to hear guitars in FL, lead vocals in C, piano in FR, backing vocals in RL, and drums in RR.    It might be more natural to use the normal stereo mix for FL & FR except for lead vocals in C and use the rear surrounds as reflections of the front channels.

Ah, what do I know?  I'm not Geoff Emerick!  All I know is that I think I prefer stereo to 5.1 for music.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I can't remember the group but one of the best productions I've heard recently, they all played around one mike in the room and that was the take the producer used as the final release. I think the original tapes are where its at.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

I'm not an audiophile - I wrecked my ears at concerts back in the 70s, plus I've work construction my whole life - but I know that when CDs came out in the 80s, the mixes from original-mono to stereo were awful. That includes the Beatles records, as well as most of Motown's 60s output. Anything recorded "hot" sounded hollow on CD.

I'm sure these are so much better now and I may buy the Sgt Pepper set just to have it.

 

[Buzzbait]

I'm not an audiophile - I wrecked my ears at concerts back in the 70s, plus I've work construction my whole life - but I know that when CDs came out in the 80s, the mixes from original-mono to stereo were awful. That includes the Beatles records, as well as most of Motown's 60s output. Anything recorded "hot" sounded hollow on CD.

I'm sure these are so much better now and I may buy the Sgt Pepper set just to have it.

Agreed. There are so many remastered CDs I have that I'd love to re-buy (i.e. Zeppelin's 8 studio albums).

 

[Bob Magaw]

Thanks bro.  Just hit record on my DVR...

 

[Bob Magaw]

Enjoyed the SPLHCB 50 doc, thought it was well done, got into some technical musical details about song construction that tend to be glossed over and overlooked in more surface level, superficial docs.

 

[Godsbrother]

Enjoyed the SPLHCB 50 doc, thought it was well done, got into some technical musical details about song construction that tend to be glossed over and overlooked in more surface level, superficial docs.

I liked it as well.  Went into great detail on some songs but didn't talk to much about others: (Sgt Pepper, With A Little Help From My Friends, Getting Better, Fixing a Hole, When I'm 64, Lovely Rita).  I did FF through the PBS fund raising breaks so maybe I missed them?

 

[saintsfan]

Enjoyed the SPLHCB 50 doc, thought it was well done, got into some technical musical details about song construction that tend to be glossed over and overlooked in more surface level, superficial docs.

It was really cool, but probably totally over the head of non musicians.  

 

[Leroy Hoard]

I liked it as well.  Went into great detail on some songs but didn't talk to much about others: (Sgt Pepper, With A Little Help From My Friends, Getting Better, Fixing a Hole, When I'm 64, Lovely Rita).  I did FF through the PBS fund raising breaks so maybe I missed them?

At the beginning the host said they would break down "some" of the songs, so I don't think we missed anything. Reminded me a little of the studio breakdown of Dark Side of The Moon I saw a couple years ago, but with more focus on the ways of the times.

 

[BroncoFreak_2K3]

That PBS special was great.

 

[otb_lifer]

guess who is topping the Billboard Charts in actual physical sales ... remarkable.

 

[Jaysus]

Who can help me understand how the 2017 remix is different than the 2009 Stereo Remix I have?

ETA: I received the following response from asking the above question elsewhere on the internet. 

Well first off, the 2009 version that you have is a remaster, not a remix. The difference being that a remaster keeps the mix of the audio the same while amplifying the quality, while a remix is tinkering with the mix of the song to different levels and changing things in the production.

When The Beatles released this album in 1967, they focused on the mono mix while other engineers worked on the stereo mix, which ended up not coming out as good as it should have been. It's also important to note that The Beatles recorded this album on a 4 track, meaning that they could record only 4 things, and if they wanted to add more instruments, they would have to go back and mix 2 tracks together, and so forth until they had enough room for everything. The down side to this is that the quality of the sound was degraded each time. What they did for this remix is that they went back to the original tracks for each song and remixed it to sound like the mono release (with The Beatles' vision) and make it for stereo. The result is an amazingly fresh sound on a album that's 50 years old.

I've been listening to this remix on repeat since it came out, and it sounds so incredible and better than ever before. If you're a Beatles fan, than is a must!

That sounds totally super awesome, and  am stoked to hear it... at my GB's house though... he is an audophile with a crazy system. 

 

[Uruk-Hai]

Guy over at Vulture ranked 213 Beatles' songs

Link Me Do

 

[Eephus]

Guy over at Vulture ranked 213 Beatles' songs

Link Me Do

"Guy over at Vulture" is longtime rock critic Bill Wyman (not the Stones' bassist).  Thankfully, it's all one long article so you don't have to click 213 times.  He adds some interesting observations about the songs' structure and historical notes.

It's one man's opinion but it demonstrates the depth of the Beatles' catalog.  There are rock 'n roll classics that Wyman ranks in the mid-100s and the top 100 are incredible.

 

[rockaction]

"Guy over at Vulture" is longtime rock critic Bill Wyman (not the Stones' bassist).  Thankfully, it's all one long article so you don't have to click 213 times.  He adds some interesting observations about the songs' structure and historical notes.

It's one man's opinion but it demonstrates the depth of the Beatles' catalog.  There are rock 'n roll classics that Wyman ranks in the mid-100s and the top 100 are incredible.

I generally check out of threads that are a bit beyond my ken, but this was heavily weighted towards John and '67-'70's era Beatles. Perhaps it was because Pepper's had its fiftieth, but it seems weighted towards hippie Beatles. 

If I may be so reductive. 

Early Beatles> Early Beach Boys

Hippie Beach Boys> Hippie Beatles

 

[Uruk-Hai]

"Guy over at Vulture" is longtime rock critic Bill Wyman (not the Stones' bassist).  Thankfully, it's all one long article so you don't have to click 213 times.  He adds some interesting observations about the songs' structure and historical notes.

It's one man's opinion but it demonstrates the depth of the Beatles' catalog.  There are rock 'n roll classics that Wyman ranks in the mid-100s and the top 100 are incredible.

I know who he is - I was being a little impish with the "guy" comment. 

My biggest disagreement with him (not just in this article, but many of his) isn't his knowledge per se, but that he leans so heavily on "the lyrics need to mean something outside of the song, man"...... until he doesn't when it doesn't fit his current argument. It's not just Wyman - a lot of the 1st & 2nd Gen critics fall into this. It just becomes especially apparent when there are 213 mini-articles piled together.

In any case, I enjoyed the article and liked that he didn't go by-the-numbers.

 

[Eephus]

I know who he is - I was being a little impish with the "guy" comment. 

My biggest disagreement with him (not just in this article, but many of his) isn't his knowledge per se, but that he leans so heavily on "the lyrics need to mean something outside of the song, man"...... until he doesn't when it doesn't fit his current argument. It's not just Wyman - a lot of the 1st & 2nd Gen critics fall into this. It just becomes especially apparent when there are 213 mini-articles piled together.

In any case, I enjoyed the article and liked that he didn't go by-the-numbers.

That's a fair point about the lyrics.  That makes more sense for a word heavy songwriter like Bob Dylan but much less so in the context of the early Beatles' pop songs.  Specifically, Wyman criticizes Love Me Do for only having seventeen different words which seems to miss the point altogether.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

To Wyman's credit, he probably top-loads more early songs than most critics of his generation would in a list like this (I've never seen "Please Please Me" this high on a ranking of these songs). I think he also nails the musical flaws of John, Paul, and George pretty well.

To me, "Ticket To Ride" is the best Beatles recording. It's hindsight but, given where they came from and what they were doing when they disbanded, you can hear a little something of each era in there. Plus, the production, playing, and singing has never been better. There are all kinds of tricksy things happening, precious. 

 

[Godsbrother]

"Guy over at Vulture" is longtime rock critic Bill Wyman (not the Stones' bassist).  Thankfully, it's all one long article so you don't have to click 213 times.  He adds some interesting observations about the songs' structure and historical notes.

It's one man's opinion but it demonstrates the depth of the Beatles' catalog.  There are rock 'n roll classics that Wyman ranks in the mid-100s and the top 100 are incredible.

Of course music is all subjective but I cannot believe that anyone seriously thinks that "Good Day Sunshine" is worse than "Revolution 9" or "Wild Honey Pie" 

 

[Big Blue Wrecking Crew]

The snark level in his evaluations was a little much for me.  And, of course, we all have our own list, so some disagreements, as to be expected.

 

[DaVinci]

Of course music is all subjective but I cannot believe that anyone seriously thinks that "Good Day Sunshine" is worse than "Revolution 9" or "Wild Honey Pie" 

He rated "You Know My Name (Look Up My Number)" higher than nearly half their catalogue. 

 

[whoknew]

PBS has a doc airing this Saturday at 8 p.m. about SPLHCB. I have no idea if it's new or not.

Recorded this last weekend. About halfway through now. 

How the hell do you talk about the history of Sgt Pepper without talking about Pet Sounds? Huge oversight.

 

[GilbertGrape]

Recorded this last weekend. About halfway through now. 

How the hell do you talk about the history of Sgt Pepper without talking about Pet Sounds? Huge oversight.

Maybe because they're talking about the Beatles and not the Beach Boys? Just guessing. 

 

[whoknew]

Maybe because they're talking about the Beatles and not the Beach Boys? Just guessing. 

But he spent the first fifteen minutes of the show talking about how Sgt Pepper was unlike anything in rock n roll history. And that's only sort of kind of true. 

In reality, the Beatles made Rubber Soul. And the Beach Boys were blown away. And so they made Pet Sounds. I'm sure you know this. That's the story of Sgt Pepper. 

Just seems to me to cheapen the brilliance of SP by not talking about what influenced it. ####, the doc talked about how Little Richard influenced the Beatles. In general. Seems weird to talk about a general influence and not the specific influence on SP.

 

[GilbertGrape]

But he spent the first fifteen minutes of the show talking about how Sgt Pepper was unlike anything in rock n roll history. And that's only sort of kind of true. 

In reality, the Beatles made Rubber Soul. And the Beach Boys were blown away. And so they made Pet Sounds. I'm sure you know this. That's the story of Sgt Pepper. 

Just seems to me to cheapen the brilliance of SP by not talking about what influenced it. ####, the doc talked about how Little Richard influenced the Beatles. In general. Seems weird to talk about a general influence and not the specific influence on SP.

I know what you're talking about but I disagree. I understand that there are BB fans who loved Pet Sounds, and I do too. But the Beatles changed the entire music scene in a way the BB never could have. Did they have influences? Sure. But they changed everything. 

 

[Uruk-Hai]

Of course music is all subjective but I cannot believe that anyone seriously thinks that "Good Day Sunshine" is worse than "Revolution 9" or "Wild Honey Pie" 

I was slow-scrolling so I wouldn't know what came next but, when I saw "GDS" was 213th, I thought immediately of the two songs you mention. I mean, "Good Day Sunshine" is a trifle but it's pretty harmless and it's at least melodic. "R9" and "WHP" are just bad and a waste of vinyl. Sub those two out for "Hey Jude" & "Lady Madonna", and the White Album gets a whole lot better,

 

[Uruk-Hai]

Of course music is all subjective but I cannot believe that anyone seriously thinks that "Good Day Sunshine" is worse than "Revolution 9" or "Wild Honey Pie" 

I was slow-scrolling so I wouldn't know what came next but, when I saw "GDS" was 213th, I thought immediately of the two songs you mention. I mean, "Good Day Sunshine" is a trifle but it's pretty harmless and it's at least melodic. "R9" and "WHP" are just bad and a waste of vinyl. Sub those two out for "Hey Jude" & "Lady Madonna", and the White Album gets a whole lot better,

 

[Righetti]

Be careful crossing the road to recreate the album cover shot.

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/07f7a97dabede41381364344f5e71ce5ff6617f4/c=0-260-4261-2667&r=x329&c=580x326/local/-/media/2017/05/24/USATODAY/USATODAY/636312148829234057-AP-TRUMP-POPE-FRANCIS-91153125.JPG

the priest, the embalmed dead guy, the grieving family

they just needed Spicer to be the guy with the shovel 

 

[otb_lifer]

Of course music is all subjective but I cannot believe that anyone seriously thinks that "Good Day Sunshine" is worse than "Revolution 9" or "Wild Honey Pie" 

keeping in mind that it's all subjective ... i find "GDS" to be plain awful.  just could never warm to it at all.  

now, the other two you mention will also get skipped when they come up in my Spotify rotation, but ... there were times back in the day where i could listen to them - yeah, a substance addled mind played a part, but i could never get high or drunk enough to abide "GDS" 

my top 10, fwiw

10) Hello, Goodbye 

9) Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds

8) I've Just Seen a Face

7) Across The Universe

6) Strawberry Fields

5) Hey Bulldog

4) Rain

3) Helter Skelter

2) Tomorrow Never Knows

1) Day In The Life

 

[Bruce Dickinson]

Be careful crossing the road to recreate the album cover shot.

Sage advice here.  It's a busy road.  Saw several groups draw the ire of motorists trying to get to there from here on Abbey Road as they tried to recreate the perfect Abbey Road album cover.  The groups where the photographer ran out to the middle of the road were the bravest/dumbest.  We had other items on our agenda that day, but honestly I could have sat there and watched people walk across Abbey Road for at least an hour.

The studios are still booked working studios and don't have public access or tours.  The store next door has live cameras of the studios so you can see who is recording there at the moment.  The store as a whole is pretty cool: tons of great photos of artists who recorded there or just visited, a wall were you can pose in front of a life-size Sgt Pepper's cover and take photos, souvenirs and trinkets of Abbey Road and the studio, and a collection that appeared to be vinyl LPs of every album recorded there.  (I didn't ask anyone working there about the LPs, so I can't confirm this.)

Out front there are walls and pillars painted white where fans sign in and leave messages.  It fills up so quickly they repaint it every four weeks and let a fresh batch of fans sign in.  I wish I'd done the homework on this part as I didn't have a Sharpie or otherwise-suitable tool for signing.  My blue ball-point pen rendering of "And in the end / the love you take / is equal to the love you make" was fun to sign in but not even worth photographing.

If you're a fan I'd also recommend one of the Beatles walking tours.  We did a broader London Rock And Roll walking tour that covered music history beyond Beatles - it was interesting touring Denmark Street even though a lot of the sites have turned over to new owners.  

 

[badmojo1006]

Who was it that screamed "I got blisters on my fingers!"?

I always thought it was John, but I am seeing that maybe it was Ringo

 

[Binky The Doormat]

Who was it that screamed "I got blisters on my fingers!"?

I always thought it was John, but I am seeing that maybe it was Ringo

nfw ...

 

[jon_mx]

Ringo.

 

[otb_lifer]

Who was it that screamed "I got blisters on my fingers!"?

I always thought it was John, but I am seeing that maybe it was Ringo

that's gotta be John's voice - that nasaly twang ... Ringo was more baritone/bass-y

 

[Leroy Hoard]

Pretty sure that was John. Proto-punk-metal at its best.

 

[Encyclopedia Brown]

Happy 75th birthday, George.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAtZIOV_6OU

 

[jabarony]

Pretty sure that was John. Proto-punk-metal at its best.

It was Ringo. 

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

keeping in mind that it's all subjective ... i find "GDS" to be plain awful.  just could never warm to it at all.  

now, the other two you mention will also get skipped when they come up in my Spotify rotation, but ... there were times back in the day where i could listen to them - yeah, a substance addled mind played a part, but i could never get high or drunk enough to abide "GDS" 

my top 10, fwiw

10) Hello, Goodbye 

9) Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds

8) I've Just Seen a Face

7) Across The Universe

6) Strawberry Fields

5) Hey Bulldog

4) Rain

3) Helter Skelter

2) Tomorrow Never Knows

1) Day In The Life

Shes so heavy & norweigan wood

 

[otb_lifer]

they're called Blac Rabbit, twin bros from Rockaway Beach - and they've been entertaining the NYC underground with some great music - pretty cool to see the young'ns diggin' the classics ...

from the Union Square station - Eight Days A Week

direct from the R train - All My Loving/Love Me Do

Times Square - I Wanna Hold Your Hand

FB Link   

 and their SoundCloud page with some originals, etc

 

[Bruce Dickinson]

Guided tour of Liverpool

 

[simey]

Guided tour of Liverpool

That's awesome.

 

[Ilov80s]

keeping in mind that it's all subjective ... i find "GDS" to be plain awful.  just could never warm to it at all.  

now, the other two you mention will also get skipped when they come up in my Spotify rotation, but ... there were times back in the day where i could listen to them - yeah, a substance addled mind played a part, but i could never get high or drunk enough to abide "GDS" 

my top 10, fwiw

10) Hello, Goodbye 

9) Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds

8) I've Just Seen a Face

7) Across The Universe

6) Strawberry Fields

5) Hey Bulldog

4) Rain

3) Helter Skelter

2) Tomorrow Never Knows

1) Day In The Life

my top 10, fwiw

11) For No One 

10) Things We Said Today

9) Eleanor Rigby 

8) I've Just Seen a Face

7)  All My Loving 

6) Something 

5) Get Back

4) Norwegian Wood 

3) Day In The Life

2) Tomorrow Never Knows

1) While My Guitar Gently Weeps