Comments on: All You Need Is LOVE: The Beatles’ Revolution Lives on at The Mirage in Las Vegas

By: Mike Mettler

Mike Mettler — Thu, 27 Feb 2014 20:57:00 +0000

Hi Bob,

Thanks for your comments. The headline of that story was very deliberately framed as a question rather than a statement, and the premise was predicated on the idea that The Beatles set forth a template for all who followed them. Without The Fabs, we would have nothing.

It wasn’t an easy list to compile. I deeply love all of the other artists you suggested, as well as bands like Pink Floyd, The Who, The Doors… and so many more.

And I totally agree with you — music IS a very emotional and personal thing. And I’m quite glad to see music has touched your life as deeply as it has mine.

MM
The SoundBard

By: Mike Mettler

Mike Mettler — Thu, 27 Feb 2014 05:37:09 +0000

Hey Andrew, What a coincidence -- I have an Oppo BDP-105 too; what an amazing, benchmark Blu-ray player, to say the very least. And yes, you can indeed find LOVE on vinyl too, and I do recommend checking it out on wax for a fine analog comparison experience. Incidentally, if you're looking for some more great-sounding LPs to spin, I highly recommend David Crosby's new solo album, Croz, as well as Mobile Fidelity's handling of the early Bob Dylan catalog, especially Blonde on Blonde. And, coming soon, Benmont Tench (keyboardist for Tom Petty & The Heartbreakers) will be releasing his first-ever solo album , You Should Be So Lucky, on vinyl. It's out on CD this week, but as Benmont himself personally told me, "vinyl is the truest way to hear this record." Especially considering the album was produced and engineered by Glyn Johns and mastered for vinyl by Chris Bellman, I'd have to agree. Happy listening! MM The SoundBard

By: Andrew Faulkner

Andrew Faulkner — Wed, 26 Feb 2014 17:33:04 +0000

MM,

Your response inspired me to re-listen to the LOVE 5.1 disc on my new Oppo BDP-105. Holy Sh$#@t. It really is a stunning sonic experience and a super-creative re-mix. I know you’re a Vinyl fan too. Is this something you recommend to pick up on vinyl too or was this project all about the 5.1 mix?

By: robert weaver

robert weaver — Sun, 09 Feb 2014 11:48:33 +0000

I read you comments on the bands you feel are better than the Beatles. I do not know the criteria you used to pick your choices but the quality of the writing, the melodic nature and feel of the songs and the impact the music had on the music industry put The Beatles far ahead of almost any group.

I do not mean to be critical but unless you were considering only that these bands went in another direction and made a name for themselves, I think for the most part you are vastly missing how The Beatles changed music and inspired all that followed them. The Velvet Underground (Lou Reed was great and Walk on the Wild Side was incredible), U2 (very droning to say the least), Radiohead (no way), TP and the Heartbreakers (1st song Breakdown was good and different), Rush (good musicians but cannot stand Geddy Lee’s voice), The Clash (What?), Bruce Springsteen (good live show, but otherwise?) and The Replacements(completely baffled by this selection). Really, were you doing LSD when you wrote this article? Of the bands you picked only Lead Zep. The Band and The Stones could even come close.
If you were considering musical talent then you missed Cream, Jethro Tull, Kansas, Beck, Bogert and Appice, Steely Dan, CSNY and a few others. If you were judging on uniqueness and blazing their own direction and not compromising, yet maintaining tremendous musicianship, Frank Zappa would have to be on the list.

Anyway we all have our own feelings on this, as music is a very emotional and personal thing. Feel free to get back to me.

Best Wishes,

Bob Weaver

By: Mike Mettler

Mike Mettler — Sun, 09 Feb 2014 05:09:29 +0000

Thank YOU, Andrew. Well, let’s see… how much time do you have? Many Beatles purists (like my good friend Little Steven Van Zandt) swear by the Mono mixes as being definitive, since that was the band’s original recording intention before they got into stereo and experimenting with 4- and 8-track recording. Other fans who grew up on the stereo mixes have a hard time hearing them any other way. Some feel the 5.1 mixes are sacrilege, but my view is that, since a) they were directly supervised by original producer Sir George Martin and put together by his son Giles, b) the surviving Beatles approved them, and c) even George Harrison himself gave the Martins a template to work from and his blessing before they got underway, I’m very much ok with them. In fact, I often audition my surround-sound system for newbies with tracks from the LOVE 5.1 disc.

Most likely, the debate will continue on and on, especially amongst the audiophile cognoscenti who are still waiting for the ORIGINAL analog masters to be used for LP pressings, among other things…

MM
The SoundBard

By: Andrew Faulkner

Andrew Faulkner — Sun, 09 Feb 2014 03:19:54 +0000

Mike,

I couldn’t agree more. The show was amazing and the sound was a feast for the ears. I also own the 5.1 mix and it is one of the better surround mixes in my collection.

I wonder what hard core Beatles fans think about the 5.1 version. I have most of the Beatles work on vinyl and love it but I know some purists need to hear everything in mono or stereo as it was intended. Not me but I’m wondering what your thoughts are.

thanks SoundBard!

Andrew