Log In
Register
1.18am
Guests
16 March 2013
Offline
It seems that Sony Music (!) is releasing a new official Beatles album (probably an agreement with Apple Corps) called “Reloved”. It includes new modern versions of some of their biggest hits. I found this link.
In the end, the love you take is equal to the love you MAKE...
2.05am
9 January 2014
Offline I’m listening to Ask Me Why right now. Personally, it sounds like a travesty to me.
2.14am
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline Here’s the press release for this:
THE BEATLES – RELOVED
NEW FABULOUS BEATLES ALBUM INCLUDING MODERN VERSIONS OF THEIR BIGGEST HITS IS RELEASED ON FEBRUARY 4 2014
A new massive and groundbreaking Beatles album will be released by on February 4 2014. The album is titled Reloved and includes modern versions of twelve of their biggest hits that preserve the original artistry but enhance it with better and fuller instrumentation. The concept is genuinely revolutionary. The tracklist includes, among the others, new versions of I Want To Hold Your Hand , Twist And Shout , She Loves You andFrom Me To You. It also includes two additional bonus alternate versions of Love Me Do and, in the 2CD Deluxe Edition, twelve newly remastered original recordings. This cutting-edge album created with modern tastes in mind is a new milestone for the greatest and most influential act of the rock era and a must have for every Beatles fan.
Considering this has been up for a week and no other site has reported it i’d seriously doubt this is official. If you think back to On Air Volume 2 and The Bootleg Recordings 1963 rumours were going about for weeks before anything official (or unofficially official) was said by Apple or its representatives but nothing about a new album of remixes.
I also doubt the whole album would be available for folks to listen to freely, Apple’s lawyers would be having the uploader and the site running for cover from all the lawsuits thundering in their direction.
The concept is nowhere near revolutionary as it was being done in the 80’s. “Massive and groundbreaking”? How exactly? And no publicity with under a week to go! If this was “massive and groundbreaking” Apple would be shouting from the rooftops and spending an absolute fortune on publicity campaigns. There has been less about this than ‘The Bootleg Recordings 1963’ and they didn’t want us to know about that.
And finally it sounds terrible and reminds me of that ghastly Love Me Do remix that someone posted here which was meant to be official (it wasn’t) and bringing the Beatles back to the masses (where had they been exactly?!). It got slaughtered by everyone. Cheesy mixes over the original recordings (some sped up a bit) that sound badly dated and are 30 years too late, even Apple aren’t that stupid, surely. Two bit fans who barely know how to use a computer could come up with better – and have done.
“Twelve of their biggest hits”? Misery , Ask Me Why , Chains , Do You Want To Know A Secret , (no question mark by the way), P.S. I Love You!?They wouldnt even get on a list of their 100 biggest songs never mind biggest hits. And sort out the letter casing, it’s just sloppy.
I will add however that you can place an order for it, for just $15.45 here. Me, i’m saving my money for the Yoko screaming Box set “JOHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!”. 23 cds crammed full of the original 18 minute track, the best Get Back sessions Jams she did with the Beatles (minus George), the best of her solo shrieks (album and concert performances), outtakes, remixes, remasters and extended outfakes. All for just $359.99. I was in two minds but the lovely box it comes in and the 56 page booklet convinced me.
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
3.05am
19 April 2010
Offline it’s obvious that this is a fake.
"She looks more like him than I do."
4.14am
Moderators
Members
Reviewers
20 August 2013
Offline 
Thank you playground monitors for being on duty and keeping our sandbox safe and clean.
Can buy Joe love! Amazon | iTunes
Check here for "how do I do this" guide to the forum. 
(2017) 
(2018)
7.22am
11 November 2010
Offline My immediate thoughts:
1. It’s not bad, though, personally, I liked The Beatles HATE more. And before anyone says anything, OF COURSE it’s not as good as the original Beatles versions.
2. “THE BEATLES – RELOVED, new fabulous Beatles album including modern versions of twelve of their biggest hits.” “Modern” is an extremely vague term to use. What does that even mean? If whoever made this actually wants anyone to actually listen to it, they need to define the style of music better. Oh, and what meanmistermustard said about it not being biggest hits. It might be more accurate to say that it’s “Please Please Me Remixed.”
3. Frankly, I’m really impressed with how well they isolated certain elements of the tracks. I mean, in 1963, they were recording on two track machines and, in order to isolate any element of the early tracks, you need to use really clever mixing tricks.
4. Obviously, it isn’t official.
5. “…enhance it with better and fuller instrumentation.” That’s an awfully ballsy thing to say about the greatest band in history. I can only say for sure that I don’t agree with this statement, but I don’t think that I’d be too out of line in assuming that most people on earth wouldn’t agree with this statement.
I'm Necko. I'm like Ringo except I wear necklaces.
I'm also ewe2 on weekends.
Most likely to post things that make you go hmm... 2015, 2016, 2017. 
11.30am
Guests
16 March 2013
Offline Well, I’ve been listening to it a few times and I have to admit I like this pretty much. I think it’s not a fake like robert suggests: I checked the link by meanmistermustard and it’s actually Sony Music releasing this CD.
In the end, the love you take is equal to the love you MAKE...
11.55am
19 April 2010
Offline it’s a fake, the press release is a fake and it’s further proof the technology is not progress. If you enjoy it then that’s great – but this is not a real official release of anything. It’s somebody with some good software and enough time and a desire to reshape some Beatles tunes. Nothing wrong with that – until you claim it’s official.
I am prepared to be proven wrong when I see it on an official website.
"She looks more like him than I do."
12.17pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline On another matter aren’t these songs copyrighted so if Apple get a wiff of this lawyers will be making phone calls and printing out and sending letters that say nice things like take it down now or you’ll be paying us lots of money.
If we tell them about this do you think we’ll get a nice gift in return? Who’s good at haggling up from a pencil topper to Carnival Of Light ?
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
12.42pm
19 April 2010
Offline the first person to wrangle a “nice gift” out of Apple will be making real history.
"She looks more like him than I do."
1.03pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline robert said
the first person to wrangle a “nice gift” out of Apple will be making real history.
True. Knowing Apple they’d try and sue us thru guilt by association.
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
4.24pm
16 September 2013
Offline I decided to buy a Roy Orbison Greatest Hits collection a few years ago. So, I randomly picked up a CD titled “The Very Best Of Roy Orbison,” that had been first released in 1987. Once I started playing it at home, I noticed that the music sounded really good… way better than early 1960s recordings usually sound. The drums were very prominent, and the mixes sounded incredibly clean and crisp. I didn’t realize it when I bought the CD, but the music had been digitally “enhanced.” I like the new versions a lot, especially when I hear the original “muddy” songs on the radio. I’ve since played this CD for friends, and many of them are horrified by the modifications. I’m not. If the technology exists to make an old song sound better, I’m all for it. I don’t think the Beatles need to be “enhanced,” but a lot of the older rock & roll (like Chuck Berry) would benefit with some modern remixing.
4.41pm
9 January 2014
Offline Couldn’t disagree more because, for one, I think that most modern remixing is appalling and is part of the reason why I feel most contemporary music has no heart or soul. Part of what I love about early records, is the sound and not just the sound of the song but also the sound of the studio or the room, the sound of the microphone, etc. And, if you go back far enough, you can hear sounds that were captured without a microphone. Those are the sounds I enjoy – the clean, sterile, computerized stuff that comes out now, I have almost no interest in whatsoever. I like a little mud in my music.
4.58pm
Guests
16 March 2013
Offline Bungalow Bob, I love Roy’s Greatest hits CD too! I have also to admit I like this “Reloved” more and more. But is it official or not? How come it’s on Sony Music and not Universal?
In the end, the love you take is equal to the love you MAKE...
4.59pm
16 September 2013
Offline ivaughan said
Couldn’t disagree more because, for one, I think that most modern remixing is appalling and is part of the reason why I feel most contemporary music has no heart or soul. Part of what I love about early records, is the sound and not just the sound of the song but also the sound of the studio or the room, the sound of the microphone, etc. And, if you go back far enough, you can hear sounds that were captured without a microphone. Those are the sounds I enjoy – the clean, sterile, computerized stuff that comes out now, I have almost no interest in whatsoever. I like a little mud in my music.
I figured I’d hear from someone who disagreed. Like I said, many of my friends were horrified when they heard the new versions. I guess I’m not a “purist” in that regard when it comes to old recordings. I don’t think the Beatles need updating, but I’m not adverse to hearing their songs with new mixes.
I was listening to the soundtrack to Quentin Tarantino’s movie “Inglorious Basterds.” Several of the songs are very old, dating back to the 1940s, and you can hear the pops and hisses of the original recordings on the soundtrack. Tarantino points out that he could have had those pops and hisses digitally removed, but he chose to leave them in, for “authenticity.” I’d rather not listen to pops and hisses.
5.05pm
16 September 2013
Offline MichWond said
Bungalow Bob, I love Roy’s Greatest hits CD too! I have also to admit I like this “Reloved” more and more. But is it official or not? How come it’s on Sony Music and not Universal?
I don’t know anything about this new “Reloved” music, except from your link. This will be interesting to follow… if is not “official,” and I suspect it is not, Apple’s legal eagles will be all over this immediately, if not sooner.
5.05pm
9 January 2014
Offline Yeah – we are different in that respect, which is, of course, fine. I’m not sure if it has to do with being a purist. I just like the old sound better. If it’s too clean or computerized, you’ve lost me. That being said, I do love the Anthology 5.1 mixes of the Beatles songs but I don’t think they made the songs sound particularly more contemporary.
That being said, I stand by my initial observation that these tracks here (not remixes, per se) are appalling, whether they are legit or not.
5.06pm
1 December 2009
Offline
Bungalow Bob said
If the technology exists to make an old song sound better, I’m all for it.
It all depends on what you think is “better”, obviously. Me, I think recording sciences peaked in the 1970s and really dislike the sound and recording methods of much post-1980s popular music, which is a big part of why prefer the old stuff so much. All that digital crap.
EDIT: Or, what ivaughan said, basically!
As far as Apple and their lawyers are concerned, regarding this “Reloved” curio…is there a possibility that this thing is entirely legal? (Not to say “official”.) Since the tracks used are all over 50 years old now, after all? I’m not sure if that makes a difference.
GEORGE: In fact, The Detroit Sound. JOHN: In fact, yes. GEORGE: In fact, yeah. Tamla-Motown artists are our favorites. The Miracles. JOHN: We like Marvin Gaye. GEORGE: The Impressions PAUL & GEORGE: Mary Wells. GEORGE: The Exciters. RINGO: Chuck Jackson. JOHN: To name but eighty.
5.56pm
10 November 2009
Offline
Necko said
3. Frankly, I’m really impressed with how well they isolated certain elements of the tracks. I mean, in 1963, they were recording on two track machines and, in order to isolate any element of the early tracks, you need to use really clever mixing tricks.
5. “…enhance it with better and fuller instrumentation.” That’s an awfully ballsy thing to say about the greatest band in history. I can only say for sure that I don’t agree with this statement, but I don’t think that I’d be too out of line in assuming that most people on earth wouldn’t agree with this statement.
On point 3, that is nothing impressive. Please Please Me , With The Beatles and the accompanying singles were recorded on 2-track yes, but that two track contains instruments in the left and vocals only to the right, and that was used to balance better the mono mix. So, the stereo mixes are just that, the two-track master except for an added layer of reverb (the reverb is more notorious in the first album).
I had to say a big NO on point 5. That is an insult to The Beatles; what they recorded originally cannot be surpassed except for something they themselves created.
And If I want to hear a Beatles remix album, I would prefer Love (or a sequel to it if it ever exists).
Let me take you down 'cause I'm going to...Strawberry Fields.
6.55pm
3 May 2012
Offline As pointed out by others, this doesn’t seem real. They’d definitely be some sort of publicity about it. Even if it were real I wouldn’t get it. I don’t really like ”remixes” of any songs generally, but definitely not Beatles songs. I just don’t see how they can be improved (well most of them, anyway).
Moving along in our God given ways, safety is sat by the fire/Sanctuary from these feverish smiles, left with a mark on the door.
(Passover - I. Curtis)
1 Guest(s)