This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I requested a citation for the claim that "This Boy" and "Yes It Is" were issued for the first time in stereo in this compilation. That may be true in the UK, but may not be so in the US as both tracks are on American Beatle LPs, Meet The Beatles for "This Boy" and Beatles VI for "Yes It Is." The obvious question which I'm sure those who own those American albums can answer is: were those tracks released in the USA in true stereo? Steelbeard1 ( talk) 01:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
"This Boy" and "Yes It Is" were originally issued by Capitol on LP, in fake stereo. Their first appearance in true stereo in the USA was on "Past Masters Volume 1". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.115.18.172 ( talk) 06:41, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
There is enough material now to split off the Mono Masters section into its own article. Because at this time, there are no plans for EMI to release this album independently from The Beatles in Mono box set, I am receptive to moving the Mono Masters section to The Beatles in Mono article. What do you think? Steelbeard1 ( talk) 11:10, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to propose moving this article to Past Masters (The Beatles albums) on the premise that this is not really an "album series", as the two volumes were released concurrently, and now it has been compiled into one single release ("Past Masters"). The article used to claim that this was a "series" of four releases - the two CDs, one LP set and the 2009 set. I think this is misleading, as there are only two volumes of Past Masters. the LP and 2009 set are merely alternate release formats. I don't think Past Masters merits being called a "series" TheHYPO ( talk) 21:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
This is a compilation album featuring EMI Beatle recordings not included in The Beatles' twelve original British albums and Magical Mystery Tour. This double album was issued so that every EMI Beatle recording would be available on CD. As such, every track listed on this album show how each track was released whether it be an A or B side of a single, an odd and end such as the German-language recordings, the Long Tall Sally EP tracks, the American album track or the charity album contribution. There are also tracks on this album which are different from the versions of the same songs in Beatle albums such as "Love Me Do", "Get Back", "Revolution" and "Let it Be." This information must remain in the article and any attempts to delete is essential material will be challenged. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 00:10, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Everyone. My name is Ernie Scribner. I've been an editor on Wikipedia for more than eight years, but I've only had a user name for the past six or so months. I've made a lot of anonymous contributions to Beatles articles, but I've cut way back on Wikipedia time lately. Anyway, I suggested to John Cardinal that he re-think a deleted change, and he suggested that I run it by this group.
My suggestion is that this article re-think the listing of "Sie Liebt Dich" and "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand" as singles. Yes, those songs were released as singles in Germany, but by that logic, "Slow Down" and "Matchbox" are also singles because they were released as singles in the United States. And, virtually everything on the Past Masters series except "Love Me Do," "From Me to You," "Sie Liebt Dich," "I'm Down," "The Inner Light," "Get Back," "Across the Universe," "Let It Be," and "You Know My Name (Look Up the Number)" are also album tracks because they were released on American albums in the 1960s.
It seems to me that identifying the songs as "singles," "album tracks" or "EP tracks" refers to their status in the official canon, that is the British releases between 1962 and 1970 (excluding A Collection of Oldies). Thus, "Sie Liebt Dich," "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand," "Bad Boy," and "Across the Universe" were not released as a part of the official canon, and should be identified as such. "Bad Boy" is already listed as a U.S. album track, and "Across the Universe" is already listed as appearing on a various artist charity album. Shouldn't the two German-language tracks, which were not released as singles in Britain, which were not included in any of the re-issue series of British singles (the 1976 green sleeve editions, the 1980s picture disc series, and the 3" CD single series) and which do not appear in any of the three officially released boxed sets of Beatles singles (the blue box vinyl set, and the 3" and 5" CD single set), be identified as "German singles," rather than simply singles?
Therefore, I would like to suggest that under "Track Listing" for volume one of Past Masters the article state something to this effect:
I leave the final decision to you guys, as you are the ones putting in most of the hard work in keeping these articles up-to-date. Thanks everyone, Ernie. Ernie Scribner ( talk) 20:14, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Remember that this is a British article so mention of the original sources has to be from a British perspective which is clearly stated in the liner notes of the album. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 12:00, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Isn't this album much more a bilingual one than an Engish and/or German one? -- Hlamerz ( talk) 13:56, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Another note on the Mono Masters, the track 'It's All Too Much' is listed as recorded in October 68, but I believe it is from sometime during the sgt pepper sessions in 67. That said, I followed the link to the song's page and it is listed there as being recorded in 1967. Just a thought I dont command authority enough to cite it and change it in the track listing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.18.57.19 ( talk) 22:20, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
The supporting citation showing the record label for disc 2 is there for a reason because the disc 2 labels say sides 3 and 4. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 11:55, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
While it is true that Past Masters was first issued as two separate CDs, the currently available configuration since 2009 is as a double disc collection. This configuration was first available as a double LP. Therefore, the track listing should be that of the double LP configuration, the way the double collection was first issued. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 17:23, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
And using that logic - The Beatles studio albums are currently out of print in vinyl, therefore the Wikipedia articles should use the 2009 remasters CD track listings? No, Past Masters - Volume One and Past Masters - Volume Two were created for and first released on CD, and the track listing should reflect this. The vinyl version of Past Masters is an irrelevance. memphisto 12:01, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
What's the point of putting something in that doesn't exist anymore? A mention that they were released originally on vinyl, or whatever, is enough.-- andreasegde ( talk) 15:36, 11 April 2011 (UTC) To memphisto. This disagreement should be resolved here first, before anybody gets into a revert war.-- andreasegde ( talk) 19:07, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Looking through this articles history, I see it featured the CD track list from the articles creation on 13 December 2008, [1] until 21 September 2009 [2], after which User:Steelbeard replaced it with the LP track list. Why? memphisto 16:30, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
And I also see that you created the short lived article Past Masters, Volumes One and Two [7], the integration of which into this article I think explains your attempts to foist the LP track list on us. memphisto 22:58, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Seeing that User:Steelbeard1 and I cannot agree on which track list should be used in this article. I looked to see if a concensus had already been established within Wikipedia.
And for every Beatles album that has been released since the introduction of the CD, the relevant article uses the CD track list only (even though all the albums were also available on vinyl).
So, I propose to follow the concensus and use the CD track list in this article. This will also remove the confusion with the track list headings - "Disc two" "Side three" etc. memphisto 18:36, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
I am quoting from the article: Past Masters was initially released as two separate CDs on 7 March 1988, with a two-LP vinyl set combining both volumes following on 24 October 1988 in the United States and 10 November 1988 in the United Kingdom. Based on this information the CDs were released month before vinyl editions. Thus these should be considered the original releases and their track listing should be - imho - the basis for the Wikipedia article. Likewise, the original vinyl releases should form the basis for all 1962-1970 releases. -- Vertigo Man-iac ( talk) 20:35, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
There is absolutely no need for an extra track list - all the Beatles album articles I listed above don’t have them. And the LP listing wasn’t removed due to “edit warring”, it was removed because it added nothing to the article (as was your short lived article Past Masters, Volumes One and Two). memphisto 13:07, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Steelbeard1, please read the comments by User:Neelix above. The fact that your first edit [9] to Past Masters, Volume One and second edit [10] to Past Masters, Volume Two were to replace the CD track list with the LP track list, shows that you have for many years held a view over this issue.
However, a concensus has been arrived at here that the CD track list should be used in this article. And please think carefully before reverting the article again. You might also want to have a look at Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. memphisto 21:25, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
As this page is only 20,634 bytes, why not put both LP and CD track listings in?-- andreasegde ( talk) 06:10, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
As noted above User:Steelbeard1's first edits to this articles two predecessors over five years ago was to replace the CD track list with the LP track list. This is a case of ownership, and User:Steelbeard1 really should take a break from editing this article. memphisto 12:15, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Right, that's enough of this bollards. Both listings can go in, and that's the end of it. Now slap me with a wet fish. End of.-- andreasegde ( talk) 22:12, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Now we need the double LP album cover. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 21:29, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
I have reverted this edit by User:Steelbeard1 as I can find no references that support this claim (including the citations referenced in the edit).
All the Beatles’ albums that followed were also released on LP: Live at the BBC, Anthology 1, Anthology 2, Anthology 3, Yellow Submarine Songtrack, 1, Let It Be... Naked and Love.
The LP was not phased out in 1989, there was just a general decline in LP sales from the late 1980’s. It should be noted that the audio market around the time of the release of ‘’Past Masters’’ was split fairly evenly into three formats - CD, LP and compact cassette. memphisto 14:19, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Firstly, Past Masters was released in 1988, and as I noted above the audio market at that time was split between three formats - CD, LP and compact cassette. And the citation you quote to support your statement "stopped shipping vinyl albums in mass quantities by 1989" applies only to the US market. The UK and European market were a year or so behind in the transition from CD to LP. memphisto 15:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
If there is a reference that is viable then it stays in. End of. It seems that there are problems about finding the correct hi-fi needle in the haystack, but reverting is not the way to do it. Find the source, check the facts, and then reference it.-- andreasegde ( talk) 17:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Steelbeard1 - Do NOT remove my edits from this talk page, which I have been forced to restore. And what is viable about a link to a on-line store which is easily contradicted[http://www.amazon.co.uk/Love-12-VINYL-Beatles/dp/B000M06SU4]. Can anyone find a reference that actually supports the claim "Subsequent new Beatles albums were released in the vinyl record format as limited editions"? memphisto 17:26, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
As I said before, it's all about references. Now how about you both trying to find as many as you can? It's about the article, y'know?-- andreasegde ( talk) 17:49, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Surely whoever said that this is a collection of rarities has to be kidding as many of the biggest hits The Beatles had are in this compilation. The earlier Rarities, which was issued as part of The Beatles Collection, is a true collection of rarities as it only consists of B-sides and assorted odds-and-ends. The addition of A-sides in Past Masters makes the use of the term "rarities" misleading. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 01:04, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
After reading the citation, I rewrote the disputed passage to read "...this collection of many of the band's biggest hits as well as rarities..." to reflect the true makeup of this compilation. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 01:11, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
when did musicdirect.com and musicbyday.com become reliable sources? Many of the music articles that I have edited for a few years seem to have deteriorated quite a lot in the time I was on wikibreak. Is no one watching? Radiopathy •talk• 00:58, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
The article notes that "Sie Liebt Dich" on the original 1988 CD is "very narrow stereo." This is a myth that has been kicking about the Internet for ages. I don't know how it got started. "Sie Liebt Dich" on the 1988 "Past Masters" is mono, without question. As evidence, open the audio of this song in a program such as Adobe Audition. Combine the two channels of audio, with one of the channels 180 degrees out of phase (easily done with Adobe Audition's "Channel Mixer"). If this was a "very narrow stereo" mix, there would be a slight bit of audio left after doing this. But if it is mono, the result would be complete silence. My result when processing the audio this way is complete silence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.142.194 ( talk) 02:24, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes, it's looking at several years of sales combined. But how realistic is it that an album that never gets higher than 149 or 121 in the album chart shifts a million copies in the US?
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I requested a citation for the claim that "This Boy" and "Yes It Is" were issued for the first time in stereo in this compilation. That may be true in the UK, but may not be so in the US as both tracks are on American Beatle LPs, Meet The Beatles for "This Boy" and Beatles VI for "Yes It Is." The obvious question which I'm sure those who own those American albums can answer is: were those tracks released in the USA in true stereo? Steelbeard1 ( talk) 01:40, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
"This Boy" and "Yes It Is" were originally issued by Capitol on LP, in fake stereo. Their first appearance in true stereo in the USA was on "Past Masters Volume 1". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.115.18.172 ( talk) 06:41, 29 August 2009 (UTC)
There is enough material now to split off the Mono Masters section into its own article. Because at this time, there are no plans for EMI to release this album independently from The Beatles in Mono box set, I am receptive to moving the Mono Masters section to The Beatles in Mono article. What do you think? Steelbeard1 ( talk) 11:10, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
I'd like to propose moving this article to Past Masters (The Beatles albums) on the premise that this is not really an "album series", as the two volumes were released concurrently, and now it has been compiled into one single release ("Past Masters"). The article used to claim that this was a "series" of four releases - the two CDs, one LP set and the 2009 set. I think this is misleading, as there are only two volumes of Past Masters. the LP and 2009 set are merely alternate release formats. I don't think Past Masters merits being called a "series" TheHYPO ( talk) 21:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
This is a compilation album featuring EMI Beatle recordings not included in The Beatles' twelve original British albums and Magical Mystery Tour. This double album was issued so that every EMI Beatle recording would be available on CD. As such, every track listed on this album show how each track was released whether it be an A or B side of a single, an odd and end such as the German-language recordings, the Long Tall Sally EP tracks, the American album track or the charity album contribution. There are also tracks on this album which are different from the versions of the same songs in Beatle albums such as "Love Me Do", "Get Back", "Revolution" and "Let it Be." This information must remain in the article and any attempts to delete is essential material will be challenged. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 00:10, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello, Everyone. My name is Ernie Scribner. I've been an editor on Wikipedia for more than eight years, but I've only had a user name for the past six or so months. I've made a lot of anonymous contributions to Beatles articles, but I've cut way back on Wikipedia time lately. Anyway, I suggested to John Cardinal that he re-think a deleted change, and he suggested that I run it by this group.
My suggestion is that this article re-think the listing of "Sie Liebt Dich" and "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand" as singles. Yes, those songs were released as singles in Germany, but by that logic, "Slow Down" and "Matchbox" are also singles because they were released as singles in the United States. And, virtually everything on the Past Masters series except "Love Me Do," "From Me to You," "Sie Liebt Dich," "I'm Down," "The Inner Light," "Get Back," "Across the Universe," "Let It Be," and "You Know My Name (Look Up the Number)" are also album tracks because they were released on American albums in the 1960s.
It seems to me that identifying the songs as "singles," "album tracks" or "EP tracks" refers to their status in the official canon, that is the British releases between 1962 and 1970 (excluding A Collection of Oldies). Thus, "Sie Liebt Dich," "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand," "Bad Boy," and "Across the Universe" were not released as a part of the official canon, and should be identified as such. "Bad Boy" is already listed as a U.S. album track, and "Across the Universe" is already listed as appearing on a various artist charity album. Shouldn't the two German-language tracks, which were not released as singles in Britain, which were not included in any of the re-issue series of British singles (the 1976 green sleeve editions, the 1980s picture disc series, and the 3" CD single series) and which do not appear in any of the three officially released boxed sets of Beatles singles (the blue box vinyl set, and the 3" and 5" CD single set), be identified as "German singles," rather than simply singles?
Therefore, I would like to suggest that under "Track Listing" for volume one of Past Masters the article state something to this effect:
I leave the final decision to you guys, as you are the ones putting in most of the hard work in keeping these articles up-to-date. Thanks everyone, Ernie. Ernie Scribner ( talk) 20:14, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Remember that this is a British article so mention of the original sources has to be from a British perspective which is clearly stated in the liner notes of the album. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 12:00, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Isn't this album much more a bilingual one than an Engish and/or German one? -- Hlamerz ( talk) 13:56, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
Another note on the Mono Masters, the track 'It's All Too Much' is listed as recorded in October 68, but I believe it is from sometime during the sgt pepper sessions in 67. That said, I followed the link to the song's page and it is listed there as being recorded in 1967. Just a thought I dont command authority enough to cite it and change it in the track listing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.18.57.19 ( talk) 22:20, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
The supporting citation showing the record label for disc 2 is there for a reason because the disc 2 labels say sides 3 and 4. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 11:55, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
While it is true that Past Masters was first issued as two separate CDs, the currently available configuration since 2009 is as a double disc collection. This configuration was first available as a double LP. Therefore, the track listing should be that of the double LP configuration, the way the double collection was first issued. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 17:23, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
And using that logic - The Beatles studio albums are currently out of print in vinyl, therefore the Wikipedia articles should use the 2009 remasters CD track listings? No, Past Masters - Volume One and Past Masters - Volume Two were created for and first released on CD, and the track listing should reflect this. The vinyl version of Past Masters is an irrelevance. memphisto 12:01, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
What's the point of putting something in that doesn't exist anymore? A mention that they were released originally on vinyl, or whatever, is enough.-- andreasegde ( talk) 15:36, 11 April 2011 (UTC) To memphisto. This disagreement should be resolved here first, before anybody gets into a revert war.-- andreasegde ( talk) 19:07, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
Looking through this articles history, I see it featured the CD track list from the articles creation on 13 December 2008, [1] until 21 September 2009 [2], after which User:Steelbeard replaced it with the LP track list. Why? memphisto 16:30, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
And I also see that you created the short lived article Past Masters, Volumes One and Two [7], the integration of which into this article I think explains your attempts to foist the LP track list on us. memphisto 22:58, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
Seeing that User:Steelbeard1 and I cannot agree on which track list should be used in this article. I looked to see if a concensus had already been established within Wikipedia.
And for every Beatles album that has been released since the introduction of the CD, the relevant article uses the CD track list only (even though all the albums were also available on vinyl).
So, I propose to follow the concensus and use the CD track list in this article. This will also remove the confusion with the track list headings - "Disc two" "Side three" etc. memphisto 18:36, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
I am quoting from the article: Past Masters was initially released as two separate CDs on 7 March 1988, with a two-LP vinyl set combining both volumes following on 24 October 1988 in the United States and 10 November 1988 in the United Kingdom. Based on this information the CDs were released month before vinyl editions. Thus these should be considered the original releases and their track listing should be - imho - the basis for the Wikipedia article. Likewise, the original vinyl releases should form the basis for all 1962-1970 releases. -- Vertigo Man-iac ( talk) 20:35, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
There is absolutely no need for an extra track list - all the Beatles album articles I listed above don’t have them. And the LP listing wasn’t removed due to “edit warring”, it was removed because it added nothing to the article (as was your short lived article Past Masters, Volumes One and Two). memphisto 13:07, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
Steelbeard1, please read the comments by User:Neelix above. The fact that your first edit [9] to Past Masters, Volume One and second edit [10] to Past Masters, Volume Two were to replace the CD track list with the LP track list, shows that you have for many years held a view over this issue.
However, a concensus has been arrived at here that the CD track list should be used in this article. And please think carefully before reverting the article again. You might also want to have a look at Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. memphisto 21:25, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
As this page is only 20,634 bytes, why not put both LP and CD track listings in?-- andreasegde ( talk) 06:10, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
As noted above User:Steelbeard1's first edits to this articles two predecessors over five years ago was to replace the CD track list with the LP track list. This is a case of ownership, and User:Steelbeard1 really should take a break from editing this article. memphisto 12:15, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Right, that's enough of this bollards. Both listings can go in, and that's the end of it. Now slap me with a wet fish. End of.-- andreasegde ( talk) 22:12, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Now we need the double LP album cover. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 21:29, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
I have reverted this edit by User:Steelbeard1 as I can find no references that support this claim (including the citations referenced in the edit).
All the Beatles’ albums that followed were also released on LP: Live at the BBC, Anthology 1, Anthology 2, Anthology 3, Yellow Submarine Songtrack, 1, Let It Be... Naked and Love.
The LP was not phased out in 1989, there was just a general decline in LP sales from the late 1980’s. It should be noted that the audio market around the time of the release of ‘’Past Masters’’ was split fairly evenly into three formats - CD, LP and compact cassette. memphisto 14:19, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Firstly, Past Masters was released in 1988, and as I noted above the audio market at that time was split between three formats - CD, LP and compact cassette. And the citation you quote to support your statement "stopped shipping vinyl albums in mass quantities by 1989" applies only to the US market. The UK and European market were a year or so behind in the transition from CD to LP. memphisto 15:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
If there is a reference that is viable then it stays in. End of. It seems that there are problems about finding the correct hi-fi needle in the haystack, but reverting is not the way to do it. Find the source, check the facts, and then reference it.-- andreasegde ( talk) 17:13, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Steelbeard1 - Do NOT remove my edits from this talk page, which I have been forced to restore. And what is viable about a link to a on-line store which is easily contradicted[http://www.amazon.co.uk/Love-12-VINYL-Beatles/dp/B000M06SU4]. Can anyone find a reference that actually supports the claim "Subsequent new Beatles albums were released in the vinyl record format as limited editions"? memphisto 17:26, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
As I said before, it's all about references. Now how about you both trying to find as many as you can? It's about the article, y'know?-- andreasegde ( talk) 17:49, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
Surely whoever said that this is a collection of rarities has to be kidding as many of the biggest hits The Beatles had are in this compilation. The earlier Rarities, which was issued as part of The Beatles Collection, is a true collection of rarities as it only consists of B-sides and assorted odds-and-ends. The addition of A-sides in Past Masters makes the use of the term "rarities" misleading. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 01:04, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
After reading the citation, I rewrote the disputed passage to read "...this collection of many of the band's biggest hits as well as rarities..." to reflect the true makeup of this compilation. Steelbeard1 ( talk) 01:11, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
when did musicdirect.com and musicbyday.com become reliable sources? Many of the music articles that I have edited for a few years seem to have deteriorated quite a lot in the time I was on wikibreak. Is no one watching? Radiopathy •talk• 00:58, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
The article notes that "Sie Liebt Dich" on the original 1988 CD is "very narrow stereo." This is a myth that has been kicking about the Internet for ages. I don't know how it got started. "Sie Liebt Dich" on the 1988 "Past Masters" is mono, without question. As evidence, open the audio of this song in a program such as Adobe Audition. Combine the two channels of audio, with one of the channels 180 degrees out of phase (easily done with Adobe Audition's "Channel Mixer"). If this was a "very narrow stereo" mix, there would be a slight bit of audio left after doing this. But if it is mono, the result would be complete silence. My result when processing the audio this way is complete silence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.96.142.194 ( talk) 02:24, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes, it's looking at several years of sales combined. But how realistic is it that an album that never gets higher than 149 or 121 in the album chart shifts a million copies in the US?