|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 13, 2009 11:18:46 GMT -5
Were The Beatles' Remasters a disappointment with the overall public, the music-buying public at large as reflected in sales? No doubt that Apple hit a home run with us(except for vectisfabber), the Beatle fanatics as to quality. To me, all I care about in album charts is Billboard 200. I don't care about Billboard Rock Albums or Billboard Internet sales or any of that. We must go with what is selling the best among all popular music. In the past, The Beatles competed with all and conquered. Perhaps no more. For some reason, Nielsen SoundScan, which gathers the data for Billboard 200, has lumped all the Beatles' stereo albums together in what is rather monolithically called The Beatles In Stereo. For the week of October 17, 2007, this The Beatles In Stereo "re-enters" the top 200 at #86, having been #15 at its peak in week one. It fell out of the charts then on week two but in week three is at #86. Hmm. That is not very impressive to me. Nothing short of a #1 on Billboard 200 for The Beatles is acceptable to me. It is #36 on "Rock Albums." Big deal, that really depresses me. Perhaps the Beatles' got screwed by not getting credit for the individual albums. I for sure thought that individually we would have seen Abbey Road, The Beatles, Revolver and Sgt. Pepper dominating the Top 10 of the 200 for a few weeks at least, perhaps in the 1,2,3 and 4 positions. Still, I would have thought that the sales of even the Stereo Box Set, as expensive as it was, was such that they would get the coveted #1 for one week. Wrong!! Guess what is #1 this week: Love Is The Answer by Barbra Streisand! WTF!? I actually like her great 1960's musical catalog but how unfair that poor old Paul McCartney wants a Billboard 200 #1 so bad that he goes crazy when failing to do so time and time again with even great albums yet Bob Dylan, Neil Diamond, others oldies, and now even Babs just waltz in at #1 without breaking a sweat. The Beatles not getting at least one week at #1 on Billboard 200 is a disaster to me at least. It tells me that only the Beatles' diehard fans cared about the remasters and we are not as numerous or as economically powerful as we like to think ourselves. We have failed with the younger generation. If we were stronger in number, The Beatles and McCartney would be having #1's again if even for just one week. #15 at best! We have lost the war! What is The Beatles Rock Band doing? I am only hearing about old people playing it(maybe with their kids) and I am not hearing about kids buying it who don't have Beatles' fanatic parents or grandparents. I am black and white on this: the Billboard 200 is pretty objective and we failed, no new #1's. Here's the Billboard 200 link if anyone has the heart to look at it: www.billboard.com/charts/billboard-200#/charts/billboard-200?begin=1&order=position
|
|
Joseph McCabe
Very Clean
A rebel to his last breath ...
Posts: 912
|
Post by Joseph McCabe on Oct 13, 2009 17:03:20 GMT -5
I always thought the remasters were for the serious fan, who had good audio gear.
It's nice that people coming to the Beatles for the first time, and wanting to buy some albums, will now get excellent audio quality. But whether they will appreciate what they have will depend on their gear - and many other factors.
|
|
|
Post by Steve Marinucci on Oct 13, 2009 18:55:06 GMT -5
I always thought the remasters were for the serious fan, who had good audio gear. It's nice that people coming to the Beatles for the first time, and wanting to buy some albums, will now get excellent audio quality. But whether they will appreciate what they have will depend on their gear - and many other factors. Joseph, I think it would make them appreciate it that much more. As for the older fans, anyone who's familiar with the older CDs should be able to hear and appreciate the difference. Granted, that difference will vary. But if you can hear the differences in something as basic as a factory installed car stereo, you know what everyone is talking about.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 13, 2009 20:25:23 GMT -5
I tweaked my first paragraph above to make it clear that I was referring to possible disappointment as to sales or impact with the public at large rather than disappointment over quality in sound and packaging which both seem excellent.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Oct 13, 2009 21:52:23 GMT -5
Before you jump off a cliff, keep in mind that the concept of "Number 1" is an illusion. One can sell 500,000 and be Number 2 if the Number 1 record sold 500,001, and a record could sell 100,000 and be Number 1 if the second highest sold 99,999. What determines a Number 1 is relative, not absolute.
You said you prefer use the Billboard 200 for its objectivity. That's fine, but how's this for objectivity:
The Beatles Could Surpass Eminem As Best Selling Act Of The Decade Posted by Mitch Michaels on 09.09.2009
With less than four months, Beatlemania could define the 2000's record sales...
With the release today of their entire remastered catalog and Rock Band game, some are expecting The Beatles to surpass Eminem as the best-selling artist of the current decade.
As of now, The Beatles are in second place with 28.2 million. Eminem sits on top with 32 million. Em will no doubt increase his numbers with interest in Relapse (and perhaps Relapse 2) as the holiday season approaches.
However, EMI is shipping nearly 2 million copies of The Beatles' remasters to the US today. A strong performance could lead to some huge numbers by the end of December. Right now, the band is expected to move 500,000 albums this week and 1.3 million by the end of the month.
There are some factors working against the Beatles, however - some are criticizing the release of all thirteen albums at once, others wonder if a new generation will care about the improved sound of the remasters that feature no bonus material and then there's the remasters box set - a pricey collection of all the albums that will only count as one sale. The biggest problem, however, may be the continued lack of the Beatles' music available for download.
No matter what happens, the Beatles 1 remains the best-selling album of the 2000's, and the band is the second biggest selling act of the SoundScan era with 58 million albums sold - they sit behind Garth Brooks, who has 69.3 million.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 13, 2009 22:35:09 GMT -5
Before you jump off a cliff, keep in mind that the concept of "Number 1" is an illusion. One can sell 500,000 and be Number 2 if the Number 1 record sold 500,001, and a record could sell 100,000 and be Number 1 if the second highest sold 99,999. What determines a Number 1 is relative, not absolute. You said you prefer use the Billboard 200 for its objectivity. That's fine, but how's this for objectivity: The Beatles Could Surpass Eminem As Best Selling Act Of The DecadePosted by Mitch Michaels on 09.09.2009 With less than four months, Beatlemania could define the 2000's record sales...
With the release today of their entire remastered catalog and Rock Band game, some are expecting The Beatles to surpass Eminem as the best-selling artist of the current decade.
As of now, The Beatles are in second place with 28.2 million. Eminem sits on top with 32 million. Em will no doubt increase his numbers with interest in Relapse (and perhaps Relapse 2) as the holiday season approaches.
However, EMI is shipping nearly 2 million copies of The Beatles' remasters to the US today. A strong performance could lead to some huge numbers by the end of December. Right now, the band is expected to move 500,000 albums this week and 1.3 million by the end of the month.
There are some factors working against the Beatles, however - some are criticizing the release of all thirteen albums at once, others wonder if a new generation will care about the improved sound of the remasters that feature no bonus material and then there's the remasters box set - a pricey collection of all the albums that will only count as one sale. The biggest problem, however, may be the continued lack of the Beatles' music available for download.
No matter what happens, the Beatles 1 remains the best-selling album of the 2000's, and the band is the second biggest selling act of the SoundScan era with 58 million albums sold - they sit behind Garth Brooks, who has 69.3 million.Thanks for that article. It confirms my suspicion that we diehards should not have purchased the box, it only counts as one measly sale even though there are what, 13 or 14 albums in each box. Second, we have our work cut out to catch Garth Brooks. 11.3 million albums is a huge gap. Depressing. I think Apple wants every house in the music buying world to have these remasters. Let's hope that the holidays pick things up. Let's Get Garth, Boycott The Box!
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Oct 14, 2009 1:32:59 GMT -5
Didn't the combined sales total in week#1 go close to 700,000 for all the albums and box sets ?
Also all the box sets were sold out wherver you went, they'll stay in the charts for a while.
|
|
kc
Beatle Freak
Posts: 1,085
|
Post by kc on Oct 14, 2009 3:28:05 GMT -5
Pardon my ignorance and correct me if I'm wrong, but might The Beatles in Stereo actually be the Stereo Box Set?
Also, isn't the Billboard 200 chart only for new and recent releases? That is, legacy albums are not eligible for inclusion. But the box set, a new release, would be .
Is it correct that only 25 000 stereo box sets for world wide release were manufactured? How many of these would have been sent to the U. S.? Even if they all had, and all sold in the first week, the box set still would not have made no. 1 on Billboard 200 as each sale would only be classed as one unit.
|
|
wooltonian
Very Clean
"Football isn't a matter of life and death - it's much more important than that." Bill Shankly.
Posts: 796
|
Post by wooltonian on Oct 14, 2009 3:52:55 GMT -5
The Beatles are no longer anywhere to be seen in the UK top 40 albums, despite a promising first week. Dame Vera is still blazing a trail at no 5. *drunkenly* <...Weeee'll meet again, Dshshsknow where, Dshshsknow when, burrah know weeee'll meet agenn one shunny daay...>
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 14, 2009 9:25:40 GMT -5
Pardon my ignorance and correct me if I'm wrong, but might The Beatles in Stereo actually be the Stereo Box Set? Also, isn't the Billboard 200 chart only for new and recent releases? That is, legacy albums are not eligible for inclusion. But the box set, a new release, would be . Is it correct that only 25 000 stereo box sets for world wide release were manufactured? How many of these would have been sent to the U. S.? Even if they all had, and all sold in the first week, the box set still would not have made no. 1 on Billboard 200 as each sale would only be classed as one unit. I think you are right that "The Beatles In Stereo" must refer to the stereo box set. I thought any album meeting the sales requirements could be in the Billboard 200. We have always read that Pink Floyd's Dark Side Of The Moon pops up there every so often. I am not normally competitive about music. The Beatles and The Rolling Stones for instance aren't a zero sum geopolitical struggle or a sporting event where there is a clear winner and a loser. We listeners can win twice with those two bands if we like both or if we just like one, the other does not detract from that. I have always ribbed Paul McCartney here about his chart obsession especially as he is in his final years making well-crafted music but in a young person's medium. It doesn't matter Paul. But yet Babs, another one of Paul's contemporaries, easily scores a Billboard 200 #1 so I know that there is something wrong because Paul couldn't even get close with the amazing Chaos and Creation. But damn-it, these are The Beatles' Remasters and I want a #1 in a major, not minor, chart! My juices are flowing and I am ready to go on a crusade for the Fab Four to help push them to the toppermost of the poppermost! I feel as inspired and as pumped-up as when President and Mrs. Obama went and got the Olympics for Chicago......oh, wait a minute. Never mind.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 14, 2009 10:13:21 GMT -5
kc you are also correct on Billboard 200 being for new albums although it is stated under the Billboard 200 title: "Billboard 200 The week's top-selling albums across all genres, ranked by sales data as compiled by Nielsen SoundScan." Other sources say the albums have to be new. Albums over 18 months old that have fallen out of the top 100 of 200 are said to be charted on Billboard Catalog Albums. It is nice to see The Beatles ruling the Top 10 of this lesser chart although that cursed MJ still rules #1. www.billboard.com/charts/catalog-albums#/charts/catalog-albums
|
|
|
Post by Beatle Bob on Oct 14, 2009 11:08:37 GMT -5
Nothing to be concerned about. They will continue to sell (it's the Beatles!) well and expect them to move up dramatically on the charts come xmas time. Remember also, that the core fan base has aged and naturally as time goes by, anything released by them won't have the impact as it did 30 - 40 years ago. Considering this, I think the remaster program went over well-- as expected. I think Apple got over the "it's gotta be #1 'cause it's the Beatles" mentality, finally. Regards, Beatle Bob
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 14, 2009 11:16:51 GMT -5
Nothing to be concerned about. They will continue to sell (it's the Beatles!) well and expect them to move up dramatically on the charts come xmas time. Remember also, that the core fan base has aged and naturally as time goes by, anything released by them won't have the impact as it did 30 - 40 years ago. Considering this, I think the remaster program went over well-- as expected. I think Apple got over the "it's gotta be #1 'cause it's the Beatles" mentality, finally. Regards, Beatle Bob As always, thanks for the reassuring words, Beatle Bob! I am afraid Apple infected me with that conceit! ;D
|
|
|
Post by Beatle Bob on Oct 14, 2009 11:40:01 GMT -5
Nothing to be concerned about. They will continue to sell (it's the Beatles!) well and expect them to move up dramatically on the charts come xmas time. Remember also, that the core fan base has aged and naturally as time goes by, anything released by them won't have the impact as it did 30 - 40 years ago. Considering this, I think the remaster program went over well-- as expected. I think Apple got over the "it's gotta be #1 'cause it's the Beatles" mentality, finally. Regards, Beatle Bob As always, thanks for the reassuring words, Beatle Bob! I am afraid Apple infected me with that conceit! ;D *LOL* Me thinks if Apple did want to reach #1 they'd have released each and every remaster one at a time like they did in '87. Thank god we don't have to wait like that again! Regards, Beatle Bob
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Oct 15, 2009 7:44:37 GMT -5
I think maybe "What were you expecting?" is a fair question. I was expecting a burst of immediate sales to the party faithful, following which these albums would carry on selling in similar annual amounts as the Beatles' catalogue has sold from the 70s onwards - all that has happened is that these have replaced the 87 CDs.
Subject to their becoming available on the internet, of course.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 15, 2009 11:13:42 GMT -5
I think maybe "What were you expecting?" is a fair question. I was expecting a burst of immediate sales to the party faithful, following which these albums would carry on selling in similar annual amounts as the Beatles' catalogue has sold from the 70s onwards - all that has happened is that these have replaced the 87 CDs. Subject to their becoming available on the internet, of course. I was literally expecting world domination by The Beatles! I thought a new phase of calm would overcome the music-listening world as it chilled to the improved Fab sounds that promote intelligence, love and peace. I expected a transformation. I got a burst of nostalgia instead that has passed like the air out of an untied balloon.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Oct 15, 2009 20:48:12 GMT -5
. . . I thought a new phase of calm would overcome the music-listening world as it chilled to the improved Fab sounds that promote intelligence, love and peace. I expected a transformation . . . For that, you're going to have to wait for Wyld Stallyns. ;D
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 17, 2009 11:40:52 GMT -5
. . . I thought a new phase of calm would overcome the music-listening world as it chilled to the improved Fab sounds that promote intelligence, love and peace. I expected a transformation . . . For that, you're going to have to wait for Wyld Stallyns. ;D LOL! My hard work this past week of promoting The Beatles has paid off. On the real album chart, Billboard 200, we went from #86 up to #34! Can I get some help, please, then we would be #1! KISS debuted at #2, very good, and Babs is slipping down but not before grabbing what poor Paul McCartney can't grab, a Billboard 200 #1. I swear Give My Regards To Boadstreet haunts Paul to this day as that film killed Paul as a chart topper. It was so bad that Paul did come across as a joke. The best news is that McCartney basher Madonna dropped from her new album's debut of #7 down to #20! LMFAO! Screw you Madonna for calling Paul boring! I hope Stella McCartney skins you alive(something Stella is capable of doing if someone disses her dad!). Now go out and push Beatles!
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Oct 17, 2009 12:19:26 GMT -5
. . . Now go out and push Beatles! I'm being held hostage by Amazon!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2009 7:38:26 GMT -5
I think Apple got over the "it's gotta be #1 'cause it's the Beatles" mentality, finally. Regards, Beatle Bob I don't think they had a choice
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2009 7:39:50 GMT -5
I think maybe "What were you expecting?" is a fair question. I was expecting a burst of immediate sales to the party faithful, following which these albums would carry on selling in similar annual amounts as the Beatles' catalogue has sold from the 70s onwards - all that has happened is that these have replaced the 87 CDs. Subject to their becoming available on the internet, of course. They were available on the internet before the official release date
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 18, 2009 7:41:48 GMT -5
Screw you Madonna for calling Paul boring! I'll do it if no one else wants to volunteer
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 18, 2009 10:58:18 GMT -5
Screw you Madonna for calling Paul boring! I'll do it if no one else wants to volunteer ;D Be careful what you wish for, fabfour! I was wondering if the dramatic jump from #86 up to #34 meant amazon.com, bestbuy.com and Wal-Mart.com, etc., finally got more stereo boxes to bill against customers' cedit card accounts and ship? That has got to explain such a marvelous jump. So be patient sayne and Cosmos!
|
|
|
Post by Cosmos on Oct 19, 2009 15:53:54 GMT -5
PATIENT; 1. one who is under medical or surgical treatment (check) 2. a person or thing that undergoes action (opposed to agent) (once again...check) 3. Obs. or Rare; a sufferer-adj. (double-check) 4. quietly persevering or diligent (god only knows how much!) 5. enduring pain, trouble, affliction. hardship etc. with fortitude, calmness or quiet submission (ARRRGGGHHHH !) 6. enduring delay with calmness or equanimity (yeah, yeah f*ing yeah!) Thanks LOADS for the empathy J.S.D. By the grace of god, apple and amazon, I too will get to actually HEAR the official Beatle's Re-Masters by (the THIRD promised delivery date on record) November 3rd! Like fab four previously stated; I'd really be pissed off, if not for the free proliferation all over cyber-space days before they were officially released on the internet...
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 19, 2009 22:50:33 GMT -5
PATIENT; 1. one who is under medical or surgical treatment (check) 2. a person or thing that undergoes action (opposed to agent) (once again...check) 3. Obs. or Rare; a sufferer-adj. (double-check) 4. quietly persevering or diligent (god only knows how much!) 5. enduring pain, trouble, affliction. hardship etc. with fortitude, calmness or quiet submission (ARRRGGGHHHH !) 6. enduring delay with calmness or equanimity (yeah, yeah f*ing yeah!) Thanks LOADS for the empathy J.S.D. By the grace of god, apple and amazon, I too will get to actually HEAR the official Beatle's Re-Masters by (the THIRD promised delivery date on record) November 3rd! Like fab four previously stated; I'd really be pissed off, if not for the free proliferation all over cyber-space days before they were officially released on the internet... LMAO! Cosmos, that was hilarious! You are doing better than I would. My career, marriage, sanity, etc. ,would be out the window as I would have gone postal waiting for the stereo box to be shipped if I were in your shoes.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmos on Oct 20, 2009 16:00:45 GMT -5
Yesssss; going Postal. When my "second" attempt to order the Box, i.e. Wally-World, sent me their condolences (TWO DAYS before they had earlier guaranteed shipment of the Box) they threw in a $15.00 gift certificate for my pain & suffering. I contemplated the amount and figured that it could buy me one bottle of cheap wine, a lighter and just enough cloth and styrofoam to make it worth my while. It seemed like a good plan until I was forced to figure in the price of the gas to get me close enough from the Northeast Kingdom to my nearest Wally-world to heave the sucker!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 22, 2009 1:46:42 GMT -5
I didn't buy the box set,i can't ,they're not available here ,so i bought 2 Beatles Remastered cd's a week and this week i completed the set...I now have them all......in stereo...
Now if only i had something decent to play them on...... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Cosmos on Oct 23, 2009 7:13:59 GMT -5
Overall Disappointment? Not with these ears my friends! Due directly to the awesome new bass response to be found on the re-mastered "Abbey Road" I was actually able to find a defect in my own listening environment! During multiple plays of "Golden Slumbers" the pureness and quality of the bass lines prompted my ears to perk up to the fact that one of the glass panels in my display case in the music room was actually vibrating; a distraction that has gone unnoticed by me playing other music for lord knows how long. EVERYTHING else was so present and vibrant in the recording, that at first I believed it to be some form of studio "buzz" until I got up and surveyed the room. Thanks to the new Stereo Remasters, my four Bose 901's are now happily bouncing off the walls with true clarity! I know it has been said here before, yet I feel that I must reiterate for the record; Ringo absolutely shines in these new masters and overall, the rhythm section has a brand new life. Drums, bass and every possible clicking, clanging, clapping, cow-belling cacophony is just literally IN the room with you! Cheers; off (from work for the day) for more Beatlemania...
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 23, 2009 7:25:28 GMT -5
Overall Disappointment? Not with these ears my friends! Due directly to the awesome new bass response to be found on the re-mastered "Abbey Road" I was actually able to find a defect in my own listening environment! During multiple plays of "Golden Slumbers" the pureness and quality of the bass lines prompted my ears to perk up to the fact that one of the glass panels in my display case in the music room was actually vibrating; a distraction that has gone unnoticed by me playing other music for lord knows how long. EVERYTHING else was so present and vibrant in the recording, that at first I believed it to be some form of studio "buzz" until I got up and surveyed the room. Thanks to the new Stereo Remasters, my four Bose 901's are now happily bouncing off the walls with true clarity! I know it has been said here before, yet I feel that I must reiterate for the record; Ringo absolutely shines in these new masters and overall, the rhythm section has a brand new life. Drums, bass and every possible clicking, clanging, clapping, cow-belling cacophony is just literally IN the room with you! Cheers; off (from work for the day) for more Beatlemania... I tweaked my first paragraph above to make it clear that I was referring to possible disappointment as to sales or impact with the public at large rather than disappointment over quality in sound and packaging which both seem excellent. I enjoyed your post Cosmos. I quote myself to reiterate that I was not disappointmented in quality of the remasters but in sales and cultural impact.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Oct 23, 2009 23:00:36 GMT -5
. . . So be patient sayne and Cosmos! Keep your distance, everyone. I just got mono.
|
|