|
Post by debjorgo on May 31, 2012 18:47:58 GMT -5
Hey, speaking of recent reviews, one I read somewhere said that the song "Ram On" is a play on Paul's early stage name of Paul Ramon. Has anyone ever read that elsewhere? Sounds plausible but I had never heard of that! From the Remastered book: "...and we decided to change our names. I changed mine to Paul Ramone, for some inexplicable reason. ... then (when) you decide to call an album RAM, it's not a big stretch to start writing a little song call "Ram On"."
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on May 31, 2012 22:37:01 GMT -5
Hey, speaking of recent reviews, one I read somewhere said that the song "Ram On" is a play on Paul's early stage name of Paul Ramon. Has anyone ever read that elsewhere? Sounds plausible but I had never heard of that! From the Remastered book: "...and we decided to change our names. I changed mine to Paul Ramone, for some inexplicable reason. ... then (when) you decide to call an album RAM, it's not a big stretch to start writing a little song call "Ram On"." Thanks. I am listening to the remastered Ram right now but I can't play it loud enough to get full effect. It sounds better than the original Ram c.d. from the late 1980's but I can't tell if it is better than Steve Hoffman's remaster job done on the "Gold Disc" out in the early 1990's. I'll play it loud over the weekend. The album itself is awesome and the pictures cool in the little attached booklet to the double c.d. version.
|
|
|
Post by Mister Kite on Jun 1, 2012 19:08:35 GMT -5
Paul was hurt because John wouldn't really talk with him. You forgot John's Rolling Stone interview in December 1970. I don't think RAM was a reaction to Lennon's Rolling Stone interview because Paul wrote the songs for the album in the summer of 1970 and he recorded "Too Many People" in particular at CBS Studios in New York on November 10, 1970. The Rolling Stone interview came out after RAM was recorded but before it was released.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Jun 1, 2012 20:06:40 GMT -5
Is it just me or is it the Eighties mix version here of "A Love for You" ? This is probably the worst possible version of one of Macca's best unreleased songs. I've definitely heard better version of this song on scratchy bootlegs and things, and it would have been nice to get a cleaned up recording. It wouldn't be so bad, but this version (which if I understand correctly was remixed in the Eighties) has updated, more modern, (and frankly less dynamic and more boring) drum sound), and it even sounds like the vocal track is new, which is dissappointing, his vocals swoop and soar in the original. Compared to the original vocals, his voice on this mix sounds flat and tired. I don't know, I guess the obviously modern drum sound doesn't really gel with the rest of the material, and frankly, this was the unreleased track I was most looking forward to.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Jun 2, 2012 12:49:24 GMT -5
Is it just me or is it the Eighties mix version here of "A Love for You" ? This is probably the worst possible version of one of Macca's best unreleased songs. I've definitely heard better version of this song on scratchy bootlegs and things, and it would have been nice to get a cleaned up recording. It wouldn't be so bad, but this version (which if I understand correctly was remixed in the Eighties) has updated, more modern, (and frankly less dynamic and more boring) drum sound), and it even sounds like the vocal track is new, which is dissappointing, his vocals swoop and soar in the original. Compared to the original vocals, his voice on this mix sounds flat and tired. I don't know, I guess the obviously modern drum sound doesn't really gel with the rest of the material, and frankly, this was the unreleased track I was most looking forward to. That is a damn shame if a Ram-era song has been tampered with! In fact that pisses me off! I had never heard "A Love For You" before and liked it a lot on first listen but I noticed it does say some kind of mix after the title like some stupid rap song. If 1980's drums or more recent vocals have been added then to hell with the whole package! I want pure Ram Paul and not 1980's Paul when he mostly sucked. What, did he add some Michael Jackson or Stevie Wonder on "A Love For You" to make it a hit today? Postulate-Era Paul needs no additives especially not shitty 1980's production techniques. Why oh why can't we get the music just as it existed in 1971??
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 3, 2012 5:42:02 GMT -5
Last night I played the mono version of RAM. I was pretty tired and dozed off during DEAR BOY and the first half of UNCLE ALBERT. I don't know if it was just me being tired, but I didn't sense a really dramatic difference with this version of the album. Paul's vocals on MONKBERRY MOON DELIGHT and BACK SEAT OF MY CAR seemed more pronounced, but overall I was underwhelmed by any "amazing revelation".
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Jun 3, 2012 6:33:37 GMT -5
Is it just me or is it the Eighties mix version here of "A Love for You" ? This is probably the worst possible version of one of Macca's best unreleased songs. I've definitely heard better version of this song on scratchy bootlegs and things, and it would have been nice to get a cleaned up recording. It wouldn't be so bad, but this version (which if I understand correctly was remixed in the Eighties) has updated, more modern, (and frankly less dynamic and more boring) drum sound), and it even sounds like the vocal track is new, which is dissappointing, his vocals swoop and soar in the original. Compared to the original vocals, his voice on this mix sounds flat and tired. I don't know, I guess the obviously modern drum sound doesn't really gel with the rest of the material, and frankly, this was the unreleased track I was most looking forward to. That is a damn shame if a Ram-era song has been tampered with! In fact that pisses me off! I had never heard "A Love For You" before and liked it a lot on first listen but I noticed it does say some kind of mix after the title like some stupid rap song. If 1980's drums or more recent vocals have been added then to hell with the whole package! I want pure Ram Paul and not 1980's Paul when he mostly sucked. What, did he add some Michael Jackson or Stevie Wonder on "A Love For You" to make it a hit today? Postulate-Era Paul needs no additives especially not shitty 1980's production techniques. Why oh why can't we get the music just as it existed in 1971?? I know, I hope someone on here can verify this.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Jun 3, 2012 6:35:51 GMT -5
Last night I played the mono version of RAM. I was pretty tired and dozed off during DEAR BOY and the first half of UNCLE ALBERT. I don't know if it was just me being tired, but I didn't sense a really dramatic difference with this version of the album. Paul's vocals on MONKBERRY MOON DELIGHT and BACK SEAT OF MY CAR seemed more pronounced, but overall I was underwhelmed by any "amazing revelation". I've noticed that there isn't much difference in sound quality either so I am thinking to get my favourite albums and then wait as time goes by for the rest otherwise will be forking out alot of money in buying the albums again. The albums I will get wil be : Venus and Mars Speed of Sound Wings Over America London Town Back to the Egg Press to Play the rest i will have to consider very carefully.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Jun 3, 2012 17:47:16 GMT -5
Remastering and mono/stereo is a really good wheeze for prising more cash from tired old punters for buying the same thing again and again.
|
|
|
Post by Cunning Old Fury on Jun 4, 2012 1:32:00 GMT -5
Last night I played the mono version of RAM. I was pretty tired and dozed off during DEAR BOY and the first half of UNCLE ALBERT. I don't know if it was just me being tired, but I didn't sense a really dramatic difference with this version of the album. Paul's vocals on MONKBERRY MOON DELIGHT and BACK SEAT OF MY CAR seemed more pronounced, but overall I was underwhelmed by any "amazing revelation". I hope your expectations weren't too high, Joe. For me, the punchiness (for want of a better word) makes it a rockier listen. But I'm not a great fan of RAM, thinking it rather soft and too "poppy" in places: perhaps that's why I like the mono album's less sugary feel. Paul's vocal talents are Ram's most interesting angle for me, and the mono album sure brings them out.
|
|
|
Post by Cunning Old Fury on Jun 4, 2012 1:36:14 GMT -5
Remastering and mono/stereo is a really good wheeze for prising more cash from tired old punters for buying the same thing again and again. And that's why downloading from naughty places makes a clear statement to the Companies: the days of ripping me off are over. At the very least, it enables you to hear before you buy, if you want to stay lawful. Don't like it? Delete the download. Like it? Buy it.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Jun 4, 2012 8:40:40 GMT -5
You forgot John's Rolling Stone interview in December 1970. I don't think RAM was a reaction to Lennon's Rolling Stone interview because Paul wrote the songs for the album in the summer of 1970 and he recorded "Too Many People" in particular at CBS Studios in New York on November 10, 1970. The Rolling Stone interview came out after RAM was recorded but before it was released. He recorded the basic tracks for Too Many People in November, 1970. It wasn't completed until early 1971. There was plenty of time to change some of the lyrics to answer John which he did.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Jun 4, 2012 8:53:46 GMT -5
Remastering and mono/stereo is a really good wheeze for prising more cash from tired old punters for buying the same thing again and again. And that's why downloading from naughty places makes a clear statement to the Companies: the days of ripping me off are over. At the very least, it enables you to hear before you buy, if you want to stay lawful. Don't like it? Delete the download. Like it? Buy it. How are you being ripped off? Being ripped off is when you buy something and don't get what you expected. If you know you are buying a repackage, you pretty much know what you're getting. Bonus tracks are extra value. Also, you know its not just the companies that suffer from illegal downloads, its the artists.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Jun 4, 2012 9:11:26 GMT -5
I don't think RAM was a reaction to Lennon's Rolling Stone interview because Paul wrote the songs for the album in the summer of 1970 and he recorded "Too Many People" in particular at CBS Studios in New York on November 10, 1970. The Rolling Stone interview came out after RAM was recorded but before it was released. He recorded the basic tracks for Too Many People in November, 1970. It wasn't completed until early 1971. There was plenty of time to change some of the lyrics to answer John which he did. Only problem is that Paul has never said that. Try again.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 4, 2012 12:14:08 GMT -5
How are you being ripped off? Being ripped off is when you buy something and don't get what you expected. If you know you are buying a repackage, you pretty much know what you're getting. Bonus tracks are extra value. The price is absurd for what you're getting. The video supplements to the deluxe set, in particular, are very lacking. THESE DELUXE SETS ARE OVER-PRICED. It's still incredible, RTP -- you just can't ever say anything even remotely negative regarding Paul to the most miniscule degree...
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Jun 4, 2012 12:50:39 GMT -5
And that's why downloading from naughty places makes a clear statement to the Companies: the days of ripping me off are over. At the very least, it enables you to hear before you buy, if you want to stay lawful. Don't like it? Delete the download. Like it? Buy it. How are you being ripped off? Being ripped off is when you buy something and don't get what you expected. If you know you are buying a repackage, you pretty much know what you're getting. Bonus tracks are extra value. Also, you know its not just the companies that suffer from illegal downloads, its the artists. I'm not being ripped off. I have neither bought nor downloaded them.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Jun 4, 2012 13:00:47 GMT -5
How are you being ripped off? Being ripped off is when you buy something and don't get what you expected. If you know you are buying a repackage, you pretty much know what you're getting. Bonus tracks are extra value. Also, you know its not just the companies that suffer from illegal downloads, its the artists. I'm not being ripped off. I have neither bought nor downloaded them. Uh, that's up to you.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Jun 4, 2012 13:03:16 GMT -5
He recorded the basic tracks for Too Many People in November, 1970. It wasn't completed until early 1971. There was plenty of time to change some of the lyrics to answer John which he did. Only problem is that Paul has never said that. Try again. He doesn't have to say it in an interview for it to be true. Maybe no one ever asked him about that. The fact remains that Too Many People and the whole Ram set were not finished until February, 1971. You can look it up.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 4, 2012 14:00:08 GMT -5
He doesn't have to say it in an interview for it to be true. Maybe no one ever asked him about that. The fact remains that Too Many People and the whole Ram set were not finished until February, 1971. You can look it up. How do you know that the references about John in the song were not already accounted for earlier on?
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Jun 4, 2012 17:02:57 GMT -5
I'm not being ripped off. I have neither bought nor downloaded them. Uh, that's up to you. Yup. No more money from me to the Beatles machine for the same thing. Again.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Jun 4, 2012 18:12:22 GMT -5
Me neither! Well, after Venus and Mars, At the Speed of Sound and Wings Over America.
Okay, and Wild Life.
Back to the Egg.
London Town....
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Jun 17, 2012 13:07:06 GMT -5
I saw the Deluxe RAM on sale at Best Buy for $99.99, which was the cheapest so far. But it was not cheap enough for me, so I still managed to hold off. I used to have a Best Buy credit card and checked my wallet -- but I guess I either tore it up or left it at home so I couldn't be weak in circumstances like this!
|
|
|
Post by heysaboda on Jun 18, 2012 12:36:48 GMT -5
.....To my ears this is an album bursting with creativity and humour. “Too Many People” begins the album on a strong note and contains some scintillating guitar playing along with some brilliant vocal acrobatics from Paul. I can’t say that I’m a big fan of Linda McCartney’s singing but I have to give her credit because this is her finest hour. You can clearly hear her harmonies and they add a dimension that I had previously missed. She shines on “Dear Boy” and her singing on "Monkberry Moon Delight" takes the edge off of McCartney’s sandpaper vocals, which are brilliant by the way. And that’s another thing - McCartney’s vocals are as strong and varied as anything he’s ever done. One minute he’s singing a beautiful acoustic ode to country life (Heart of the Country) and the next minute he’s howling for “Monkberry Moon Delight.” “Smile Away” is another gritty performance that is quite funny with a killer guitar riff. “Uncle Albert” is like a mini operetta with its multiple time changes, half a dozen vocal styles and catchy chorus. The intro draws you in immediately when Paul sings in a beautiful falsetto “…there’s no one left at home and I believe I’m going to rain…” and then you hear the sound of thunder and rain panning from one speaker to the next. Simply brilliant. I have only had time to listen to the original stereo version of Ram so I can’t comment on the mono / Percy Thrillington / outtake cd’s. I haven’t seen the dvd either but I can tell you if you really like the Ram album, save your money for this version. I don’t know if this is McCartney’s peak as a solo artist but it’s definitely in the running for one of his top albums. It is rich with ideas and has aged very well. It’s odd that you never see Ram on those goofy 100 best album lists but I guess it wouldn’t be trendy now would it? Stuff ‘em all, this is a masterpiece. (Sorry for being so long winded). Great post, Sir Frankie! Nicely put!
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Jul 10, 2012 10:20:06 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Jul 10, 2012 11:57:57 GMT -5
I have been saying for years that RAM was Paul's Pet Sounds. This review nailed it pretty much.
|
|
|
Post by ReturnToPepperland on Jul 10, 2012 12:31:20 GMT -5
I have been saying for years that RAM was Paul's Pet Sounds. This review nailed it pretty much. I remember your posts on that. And it is a convincing case.
|
|
|
Post by theman on Aug 1, 2012 12:58:27 GMT -5
Ok, bringing it back to the music, I have a question.
Is it really worth spending $75+ for the super deluxe Ram package (given that I already own the Ram and Thrillington CDs in their original state, granted I've never heard the famous mono version of Ram). Or is it worth just buying the bonus, unreleased tracks on iTunes?
Or neither. Just trying to spend my money wisely.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Aug 1, 2012 16:58:13 GMT -5
Ok, bringing it back to the music, I have a question. Is it really worth spending $75+ for the super deluxe Ram package (given that I already own the Ram and Thrillington CDs in their original state, granted I've never heard the famous mono version of Ram). Or is it worth just buying the bonus, unreleased tracks on iTunes? Or neither. Just trying to spend my money wisely. I'd say, if you can ask yourselves that logically, then you probably only need a few of the bonus tracks from Itunes. I, personally, did not have a choice. It is a pretty nice package to have, though. And there's a book of pictures of sheep.
|
|
Joseph McCabe
Very Clean
A rebel to his last breath ...
Posts: 912
|
Post by Joseph McCabe on Aug 1, 2012 21:27:05 GMT -5
Ok, bringing it back to the music, I have a question. Is it really worth spending $75+ for the super deluxe Ram package (given that I already own the Ram and Thrillington CDs in their original state, granted I've never heard the famous mono version of Ram). Or is it worth just buying the bonus, unreleased tracks on iTunes? Or neither. Just trying to spend my money wisely. Probably not worth the big money. But I can recommend the mono RAM. Beg, borrow, or steal it. You know what they say: stereo RAM is a pop album, but mono RAM is a rock album. McCabe
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Aug 1, 2012 22:08:48 GMT -5
Ok, bringing it back to the music, I have a question. Is it really worth spending $75+ for the super deluxe Ram package (given that I already own the Ram and Thrillington CDs in their original state, granted I've never heard the famous mono version of Ram). Or is it worth just buying the bonus, unreleased tracks on iTunes? Or neither. Just trying to spend my money wisely. Probably not worth the big money. But I can recommend the mono RAM. Beg, borrow, or steal it. You know what they say: stereo RAM is a pop album, but mono RAM is a rock album. McCabe I'm going to intervene here. I know Joe was already burned on this whole mono RAM thing. I can't tell a difference, except that it is mono. And that sucks.
|
|