|
Post by John S. Damm on Feb 12, 2014 16:28:24 GMT -5
Isn't that weird why an Elton John greatest hits and old Rumours are flying up the chart? I loved Elton in the day but he is horrible now. What have they done to get their albums zooming up the charts? This was The Beatles time to shine and make runs up the chart.
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Feb 12, 2014 18:10:08 GMT -5
The other Beatle fan at work said he watched the show last night and really enjoyed it. He did not realize that there would be so much film of the Beatles actually singing. He thought it would be all bands covering the songs. He asked why I hadn't talked up how good it was.
I spoke with another friend at work who is not a big Beatle fan, I pass on Paul's discs here and there, if he saw the show. He likes the Paul discs enough to keep borrowing them but he never really says their good. He bought Rubber Soul a few years back. He said he didn't know it was coming on. He hadn't heard about it. I said it's being broadcast again tonight. He said he'd tried to catch it.
Another guy heard us talking and said he'd heard it was good. He said even his mother and law had called to say she'd seen it and liked it a lot.
I later heard yet another guy at work talking to someone else. All I heard him say was "Don (that's me) says it's coming on again tonight". So there is a little buzz going on, where I work anyway.
By the way, it's showing up in my DVR TV Guide now.
|
|
|
Post by sallyg on Feb 23, 2014 9:37:13 GMT -5
Isn't that weird why an Elton John greatest hits and old Rumours are flying up the chart? I loved Elton in the day but he is horrible now. What have they done to get their albums zooming up the charts? This was The Beatles time to shine and make runs up the chart. John, I was looking on the Billboard Top 200 albums chart and I noticed that the Beatles have several albums on the charts. Beatles 1 is the highest ranking with #20. www.billboard.com/charts/billboard-200
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Feb 23, 2014 13:54:50 GMT -5
Isn't that weird why an Elton John greatest hits and old Rumours are flying up the chart? I loved Elton in the day but he is horrible now. What have they done to get their albums zooming up the charts? This was The Beatles time to shine and make runs up the chart. John, I was looking on the Billboard Top 200 albums chart and I noticed that the Beatles have several albums on the charts. Beatles 1 is the highest ranking with #20. www.billboard.com/charts/billboard-200Cool! I was so disgusted when I posted the above I quit looking at Billboard. I do wish one of the American "Capitol" albums was doing that well. I think 1 is a freaky creature not having PPM on it or the so-called double A-Side SFF!
|
|
|
Post by sallyg on Feb 23, 2014 17:11:45 GMT -5
John, I was looking on the Billboard Top 200 albums chart and I noticed that the Beatles have several albums on the charts. Beatles 1 is the highest ranking with #20. www.billboard.com/charts/billboard-200Cool! I was so disgusted when I posted the above I quit looking at Billboard. I do wish one of the American "Capitol" albums was doing that well. I think 1 is a freaky creature not having PPM on it or the so-called double A-Side SFF! I think 1 is primarily a second generation Beatles album. I think it's cool that a band who broke up 40 years ago has several albums on the Billboard 200.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Feb 23, 2014 18:13:42 GMT -5
Agreed but I want some #1s to prove we are the best. We live in a "what have you done for me lately" society so if the Fabs can't be #1 with all of the free hype they got, then many newbies will doubt their greatness. Kids today want to see #1s, then they declare greatness. #20 for 1 is chump change to kids today, no matter how old The Beatles are.
That 50th good will for Beatles is over. There was no renewed Beatlemania in 2014. The Dream is over.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 23, 2014 21:07:42 GMT -5
Agreed but I want some #1s to prove we are the best. We live in a "what have you done for me lately" society so if the Fabs can't be #1 with all of the free hype they got, then many newbies will doubt their greatness. Kids today want to see #1s, then they declare greatness. #20 for 1 is chump change to kids today, no matter how old The Beatles are. That 50th good will for Beatles is over. There was no renewed Beatlemania in 2014. The Dream is over. Sorry, JSD, but what you're saying here is nonsense. I keep posting scores of videos in a separate thread about today's new generations of kids who are Beatle Fans, but rather than concede it, that thread has gone largely ignored. Okay, so be it -- but enough very young people in 2014 love The Beatles, and they go to see Paul and Ringo on tour -- and it doesn't matter to them if an album doesn't get to #1 . The fact that "1" is #20 in 2014 for an album released way back in 2000, and for a band that broke up 44 years ago in 1970, is nothing short of ASTOUNDING. You are never going to have the numbers of teens obsessed with The Beatles in 2014 like they had in 1964, and it does not matter and is perfectly okay! There always were -- and always will be -- a huge fan base, and it's the young newbies who keep those fires burning! The Beatles CBS Tribute came in second only to the phenomenally popular Olympics! That is one hell of an achievement also.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Feb 23, 2014 22:17:24 GMT -5
"Scores?" I have seen a couple of your videos of newbie Beatle kids who are clearly not even in the mainstream of their peers.
There will always be a few kids in their class who like The Beatles but from what I am seeing in your videos and with my own eyes in my world is they are the kids who walk to the beat of a different drum which is okay because I had to do it in 1975 right before the big Beatles 2nd Wave of 1976 and I learned how to be a pretty tough fighter because of it, the older Black Sabbath and Led Zeppelin guys wanting to pick on the very few young Beatles fans in 1975 thinking we were forever stuck in "Love Me Do."
February 9, 2014 came and went and.......nothing. Only diehards got pumped. A crappy 2000 compilation got to #20 but that is for subway Beatles fans anyway.
I wanted The Beatles to hold the first 10 slots on the Billboard 200.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 23, 2014 22:37:52 GMT -5
"Scores?" I have seen a couple of your videos of newbie Beatle kids who are clearly not even in the mainstream of their peers. There will always be a few kids in their class who like The Beatles but from what I am seeing in your videos and with my own eyes in my world is they are the kids who walk to the beat of a different drum which is okay because I had to do it in 1975 right before the big Beatles 2nd Wave of 1976 and I learned how to be a pretty tough fighter because of it, Okay then -- so where is the problem? Who cares? The Beatles' Legacy in 2014 is not concerned with the 95% of modern day classrooms who do not care about The Beatles. Nobody need pay those outsiders to the circle any credence or mind. BUT, when we assemble the World's new teenagers who do love The Beatles and follow and collect them, there are way more than enough to still go around and keep The Beatles rejuvenated long after you and I are gone. So what? They never stopped me from being a Beatles Freak in 1975, and they won't stop a 14-year-old in 2014 -- or in 2050 .... Then you should have made it to NYC for the amazing 50th Tribute Beatlefest. And Why do you insist on disregarding facts, even though I've reminded you of it a few times already? The CBS TRIBUTE almost made it to #1 -- seconded only by the Greatest Show On Earth, THE OLYMPICS. What in the world would you "realistically" expect in 2014? And then you get mad at me when I ask you "are you being serious"? Of course you're just being outrageous here for the sake of it.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 23, 2014 22:40:59 GMT -5
"Scores?" I have seen a couple of your videos of newbie Beatle kids I could probably post dozens and dozens more from YouTube... or you could do the leg work yourself if you like. There aren't only a couple of these newbies. You're dreaming if you think it will ever be the likes of 1964 ever again, but this is as great as it will ever become for any other band, 50 years later and counting. Don't you realize that the appeal and longevity of The Beatles is because their music always lives on and continues to influence new generations?
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Feb 24, 2014 1:17:37 GMT -5
"Scores?" I have seen a couple of your videos of newbie Beatle kids who are clearly not even in the mainstream of their peers. There will always be a few kids in their class who like The Beatles but from what I am seeing in your videos and with my own eyes in my world is they are the kids who walk to the beat of a different drum which is okay because I had to do it in 1975 right before the big Beatles 2nd Wave of 1976 and I learned how to be a pretty tough fighter because of it, Okay then -- so where is the problem? Who cares? The Beatles' Legacy in 2014 is not concerned with the 95% of modern day classrooms who do not care about The Beatles. Nobody need pay those outsiders to the circle any credence or mind. BUT, when we assemble the World's new teenagers who do love The Beatles and follow and collect them, there are way more than enough to still go around and keep The Beatles rejuvenated long after you and I are gone. So what? They never stopped me from being a Beatles Freak in 1975, and they won't stop a 14-year-old in 2014 -- or in 2050 .... Then you should have made it to NYC for the amazing 50th Tribute Beatlefest. And Why do you insist on disregarding facts, even though I've reminded you of it a few times already? The CBS TRIBUTE almost made it to #1 -- seconded only by the Greatest Show On Earth, THE OLYMPICS. What in the world would you "realistically" expect in 2014? And then you get mad at me when I ask you "are you being serious"? Of course you're just being outrageous here for the sake of it. My problem with young fans these days is that they use The Beatles as a stepping stone. Yeah, for a year or so they claim to be like us but off to Pink Floyd they go or to the Stones or to Prince or even to the late Michael Jackson. I have seen it happen too often to get excited when some urchin comes running to me, "Oh my parents say you are Logansport's biggest Beatles fan, can I hear some of your collection?" I always get excited, show the punks cool Beatles movies/videos, burn all the albums for them, do more for them than their parents and suddenly the kid quits bugging me and I'll see him at Wal-Mart and he'll sheepishly admit that now he likes Oasis best but, "Hey JSD, thanks for your time!" I always feel like a chump so forgive me if I treat newbie Beatle fans bad because too many have broken my heart and wasted my time! I am serious, I wanted The Beatles to make a historic run on the Billboard 200. Didn't you?
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Feb 24, 2014 7:01:54 GMT -5
My problem with young fans these days is that they use The Beatles as a stepping stone. Yeah, for a year or so they claim to be like us but off to Pink Floyd they go or to the Stones or to Prince or even to the late Michael Jackson. I have seen it happen too often to get excited when some urchin comes running to me, "Oh my parents say you are Logansport's biggest Beatles fan, can I hear some of your collection?" I've seen kids who began using other artists as stepping stones and didn't really "get" The Fabs right away, and then ultimately came to The Beatles afterward. As well as then becoming diehard Beatlemaniacs. How many kids are literally running up to you in Logansport, asking to hear some of your collection, only to later return to you and tell you they've gone off The Beatles and are into Prince now? Look at that video I've just posted about those two young female Beatleholics at the NY Fest --- you really don't think they're hooked for life? You can see many online collection videos by younger people in 2014 who aren't just asking some old dude to burn them a CD, but they are actually physically COLLECTING Vinyl Records, CDs, Books - and they have their rooms wallpapered with Beatles memorabilia. Of course these kids are 1 in 10 or 1 in 20 -- but as I said previously, this is not important. What matters is how huge the ranks still are worldwide when you take all of them into consideration for the 21st Century. Who are these punks and how do you meet them? The world at large is a much bigger place than what either you or I are seeing. I am more realistic. You said you wanted the TOP TEN to be all Beatles albums. Did that even occur in 1964 during the heart of Beatlemania? It would have been nice if two or three of the CDs made it into the Top FIVE, or if the "1" hits collection hit the Top TEN. But for a band that hasn't made a new record since the 1960s, and considering that their core fan base already owns these recordings several times over, it's actually pretty impressive to see "1" at #20 in 2014 . Who do you think purchased "1" in 2014 to make it rise so high? Had to be mainly Newbies. It seems like you're fighting it to me. Are you happier about the CBS TV Special ranking yet?
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Feb 24, 2014 12:13:02 GMT -5
I can name five kids(well, I won't for privacy concerns) with two being my stepsons, one a nephew(who would come over and literally hang with me for hours listening/watching Beatles until he got into heavy metal and I never saw him again for Fab stuff) and two children of very good friends. There have been more but I spent a lot of time on these five and gladly so. They all left before becoming diehards. All five of these kids dug The Beatles at first and could not get enough of them. They all then moved on to other bands and music. I admit that I probably rushed my stepsons thus burning them out but they were a captive audience. Yet, they still like a lot of it today when they happen to hear it and the younger one texted me during the CBS Special saying he was watching it. Sure I was thrilled about the CBS Special but only to an extent. We still got beat by the Winter Olympics....zzzzzzzzzz. I read the zombie show also beat it, the one on AMC but you have said that was not true. Joe, I have had better luck turning kids on to The Avett Brothers, my second favorite group in the world. They are younger and still rising as a band. Many of my friends' high school and college kids love them thanks to me. I wish I was getting a finder's fee from the band for making it new fans!
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Feb 24, 2014 18:05:49 GMT -5
Do you think the Avett Brothers will ever be able to do a prime time special and outdraw the Walking Dead? I doubt it. Certainly not 50 years from now.
The Walking Dead show that night was a season premiere. It has a very loyal following and a live talk show following it that reviews what happened on the show that night.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Feb 25, 2014 1:06:38 GMT -5
It was kind of cool seeing 1 at #20. Hey, LOVE is #62. In a WTF moment, Abbey Road is #82 but it says its peak position was #48! WTF!? It can't be that it is old because SPLHCB is #98 but its peak position is shown as #1!
Billboard dissed AR!
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Feb 25, 2014 10:25:47 GMT -5
It was kind of cool seeing 1 at #20. Hey, LOVE is #62. In a WTF moment, Abbey Road is #82 but it says its peak position was #48! WTF!? It can't be that it is old because SPLHCB is #98 but its peak position is shown as #1!
Billboard dissed AR! Okay, I ended my boycott of BILLBOARD and here is the rundown for the week of March 1, 2014: #20 1, peak #1(back in the early 2000's); #62 LOVE, peak #4(I don't remember it getting that high but cool!); #82 Abbey Road, peak#48(don't understand that as illustrated below); #98 SPLHCB, peak #1(okay, did this hit #1 in the modern era, why isn't AR shown peaked at #1?); #103 Rubber Soul, peak #86((WTF!); #119 The Beatles, peak #1(again, did it hit #1 in the modern era?); #137 The Beatles 1967-1970, peak #1; #145 BBC 2, peak #7; #150 A Hard Day's Night, peak #102(I can understand this as it is the U.K. version); #154 The Beatles 1962-1966, peak #3; #156 Revolver, peak #1(okay, when did the U.K. Revolver hit #1 on Billboard 200?); 170 Meet The Beatles, peak #1(Okay, how does MTB have a peak #1 and not AR!!!!!); #186 Hey Jude, peak #72(again, no credit for original peak upon release???). Looks good but to put in perspective, Journey's Greatest Hits is #29 and rising, besting all but 1. Journey SUCKS! I sure want to know how Billboard determines peak position?! How does MTB have a #1 peak while AR has a #48 peak position?
|
|
|
Post by joeyself on Feb 25, 2014 13:28:37 GMT -5
I asked Steve about the titles that were both UK and US; he said the US albums are the ones that are on the chart for AHDN, RUBBER SOUL and REVOLVER--I looked at Billboard on line and couldn't tell how he knew that. He may well get the actual magazine with catalog numbers by the albums--I don't doubt him, I just can't see it for myself when I look, and the peak positions certainly doesn't LOOK like the US album chart history.
JcS
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Feb 25, 2014 13:47:50 GMT -5
I asked Steve about the titles that were both UK and US; he said the US albums are the ones that are on the chart for AHDN, RUBBER SOUL and REVOLVER--I looked at Billboard on line and couldn't tell how he knew that. He may well get the actual magazine with catalog numbers by the albums--I don't doubt him, I just can't see it for myself when I look, and the peak positions certainly doesn't LOOK like the US album chart history. JcS On reflection, they probably are U.S. versions but those peak positions are wack! I agree with the ones shown as #1 but how in the heck is AR, RS and some of those others not have a peak #1? MTB has peak #1 so that proves Billboard is going by original peak(not a re-issue peak) as I don't think MTB was ever #1 after 1964 and was out of print from roughly 1987 until 2004(and not individually sold until 2014). I call upon Billboard to correct this vile slander on all original Beatles albums not shown with a peak #1 even assuming we use the U.S. version because those were all #1s as found on the current Billboard 200, including I believe Hey Jude( a U.S. creation)!
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Feb 25, 2014 13:56:45 GMT -5
Doh! Wikipedia says Hey Jude the album only made it to #2 on the Billboard 200! You American Firsties dropped the ball! How could you let that cool album not peak at #1? Don't blames us SecGen fans! Don't look at me!
|
|
|
Post by joeyself on Feb 25, 2014 14:01:19 GMT -5
I asked Steve about the titles that were both UK and US; he said the US albums are the ones that are on the chart for AHDN, RUBBER SOUL and REVOLVER--I looked at Billboard on line and couldn't tell how he knew that. He may well get the actual magazine with catalog numbers by the albums--I don't doubt him, I just can't see it for myself when I look, and the peak positions certainly doesn't LOOK like the US album chart history. JcS On reflection, they probably are U.S. versions but those peak positions are wack! I agree with the ones shown as #1 but how in the heck is AR, RS and some of those others not have a peak #1? MTB has peak #1 so that proves Billboard is going by original peak(not a re-issue peak) as I don't think MTB was ever #1 after 1964 and was out of print from roughly 1987 until 2004(and not individually sold until 2014). I call upon Billboard to correct this vile slander on all original Beatles albums not shown with a peak #1 even assuming we use the U.S. version because those were all #1s as found on the current Billboard 200, including I believe Hey Jude( a U.S. creation)! Yeah, I am not sure what criteria is used for a peak position. HEY JUDE peaked at #2. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hey_Jude_%28album%29JcS
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Feb 25, 2014 16:16:14 GMT -5
LOL, you and I posted at the exact same time about HJ's peak position(see my post right above yours). HJ was a comp but with those powerhouse singles now in glorious stereo for the album, how did those Firsties let that album ONLY get to #2!? I guess it is up to us SecGen's, the Class of 1973-1976, to keep the flame alive!
|
|
|
Post by joeyself on Feb 25, 2014 17:51:46 GMT -5
LOL, you and I posted at the exact same time about HJ's peak position(see my post right above yours). HJ was a comp but with those powerhouse singles now in glorious stereo for the album, how did those Firsties let that album ONLY get to #2!? I guess it is up to us SecGen's, the Class of 1973-1976, to keep the flame alive! I looked, and it appears that HEY JUDE was kept out of the top slot by BRIDGE OVER TROUBLED WATERS. LED ZEPPELIN II was #1 when it was released, but in those days, albums usually took a few weeks to top the chart (the first to debut at number 1 was CAPTAIN FANTASTIC in '75). en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Billboard_200_number-one_albums_of_1970JcS
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Feb 25, 2014 18:15:45 GMT -5
Well, that's a good album to be stopped by! I really like Bridge Over Trouble Water, a fine album. HJ is a great album. A friend of mine in high school bought the 8-track tape solely for "Paperback Writer." He greatly disliked every other song!
|
|
|
Post by debjorgo on Mar 1, 2014 9:23:28 GMT -5
Going through my old DVR recordings, I just saw an advert for the Beatles "50 Years Ago, Beatlemania" for Face the Nation, Feb 9th, oddly enough. I missed this.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Mar 2, 2014 0:08:25 GMT -5
Okay, I ended my boycott of BILLBOARD and here is the rundown for the week of March 1, 2014: #20 1, peak #1(back in the early 2000's); #62 LOVE, peak #4(I don't remember it getting that high but cool!); #82 Abbey Road, peak#48(don't understand that as illustrated below); #98 SPLHCB, peak #1(okay, did this hit #1 in the modern era, why isn't AR shown peaked at #1?); #103 Rubber Soul, peak #86((WTF!); #119 The Beatles, peak #1(again, did it hit #1 in the modern era?); #137 The Beatles 1967-1970, peak #1; #145 BBC 2, peak #7; #150 A Hard Day's Night, peak #102(I can understand this as it is the U.K. version); #154 The Beatles 1962-1966, peak #3; #156 Revolver, peak #1(okay, when did the U.K. Revolver hit #1 on Billboard 200?); 170 Meet The Beatles, peak #1(Okay, how does MTB have a peak #1 and not AR!!!!!); #186 Hey Jude, peak #72(again, no credit for original peak upon release???). Looks good but to put in perspective, Journey's Greatest Hits is #29 and rising, besting all but 1. Journey SUCKS! I sure want to know how Billboard determines peak position?! How does MTB have a #1 peak while AR has a #48 peak position? Wow, the feelgood of Feb. 9, 2014 is dead and buried, The Beatles are dropping like flies from Billboard 200 for week of March 8, 2014: 1 is #44, down from #20. Abbey Road is #103, down from #82. SPLHCB is #132, down from #98. The Beatles is #155, down from #119. Rubber Soul is #172, down from #103. BURN! The Eagles Greatest Hits is higher than all but 1! Pink Floyd's Dark Side Of The Moon is once again in the top 200!
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Mar 2, 2014 0:14:20 GMT -5
Wow, the feelgood of Feb. 9, 2014 is dead and buried, The Beatles are dropping like flies from Billboard 200 for week of March 8, 2014 Next time make sure you come to the Fest For Beatles Fans in 2064! You'll be feeling the vibe for weeks afterward, if not months! Or, just hang out on YouTube with the various generations still making eager Beatles 2014 videos!
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Mar 2, 2014 6:44:10 GMT -5
1 is #44, down from #20. WOW! You mean "1" is still as high as #44 after it had been way up to #20 ? That's still quite impressive for an album that's been out for 14 years already, consisting of songs that are 50 years old, in an age of digital downloading! I guess those small cliques of newbie Beatles fans cliquing together in the corners of every school across the country must be pretty potent when added as a whole! BEATLES FOREVER!
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Mar 2, 2014 10:43:14 GMT -5
1 is #44, down from #20. WOW! You mean "1" is still as high as #44 after it had been way up to #20 ? That's still quite impressive for an album that's been out for 14 years already, consisting of songs that are 50 years old, in an age of digital downloading! I guess those small cliques of newbie Beatles fans cliquing together in the corners of every school across the country must be pretty potent when added as a whole! BEATLES FOREVER! What?! Since when have Beatles fans settled for #20. We don't have a greatest hits album titled 20! Not me! I say we redouble our efforts and let's go get us some new Beatles #1's. Who's with me, let's go!
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Mar 2, 2014 12:31:27 GMT -5
What?! Since when have Beatles fans settled for #20. It's now an older release that almost everyone already owns. True, but take solace in the fact that the "1" album DID indeed get to #1 when it was new! From Wikipedia: The reception of 1 surpassed all critical and commercial expectations. It reached No. 1 in over 35 countries, achieving the record for the album debuting at the top of the most national charts ever. It became the highest-selling of 2000 and later, of the entire decade. This achievement made The Beatles the first and only artist to have the best-selling albums of two different decades. They also had the best-selling album of the 1960s, Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band. No tracks from Sgt. Pepper appear on this album. With this album, The Beatles also achieved having an album hit the No. 1 position in the U.S. in four non-consecutive decades (1960s, 1970s, 1990s and 2000s).[/quote] Good enough for ya?
|
|
|
Post by joeyself on May 3, 2014 9:05:44 GMT -5
February 9, 2014 is the 50th anniversary of The Beatles' debut on the Ed Sullivan Show where they captured the heart of American Youth in one night. We have had B.B.C. 2, 1963 Bootleg Series on iTunes, and Capitol Records is releasing the entire U.S. Beatles catalog in one box. There are special shows on the networks planned to mark the Beatles 50th Anniversary on these shores. Question: Is the United States set for another wave of post-breakup Beatlemania like we experienced in 1976 and 2000, as just two years where the Beatles were very popular? Will the Beatles albums hit the top of the Billboard 200 or will this just be a sentimental remembrance for us older fans? My answer to the two questions, one at a time: This isn't quite like 1976 and 2000 for a couple of reasons. First, those two spikes in the interest was driven new compilations, (ROCK AND ROLL MUSIC and 1, respectively), where they are apparently banking the 50th on the re-issue of the American catalog. In '76, EMI/Capitol regained control over the catalog, and started milking the cash cow--a nice promotional budget never hurts. Also, had the two Capitol boxes not come out a few years ago--if this was the debut of those albums on CD--then more interest may have been generated. (Releasing the titles as individual albums instead of in the box MAY help, though.) Second, neither '76 or 2000 were anniversary dates; we can look back at how the 20th, 25th, 30th, 35th and 40th were received by the public, and get a better gauge on how the 50th will be seen. True, there is something to a half-century mark, but I think, in a way, that only serves to cement in a young person--less than 40, let's say--that this is not their music. Second question: I think the albums will chart very well, because they don't have to move as many units now to chart highly as they did even 10 years ago. I am assuming these (save THE BEATLES STORY) will be available for download, but if so I'm not sure these will sell proportionally as many in download format as they will in hard copies, because the nostalgia crowd will be looking for the whole experience of seeing the album jackets (in CD form, it won't quite be the same). But the observation about the "sentimental remembrance" is also what I think will happen. I expect the albums to chart highly in the first couple of weeks, and drop off sharply soon thereafter, as those interested will buy their copies in the first couple of weeks, and the album charts may look like a singles chart in the first half of '64, but I doubt it will be sustained long. I make these predictions and observations now, knowing in three months, we'll have a better handle on it...but then, it won't be predictive at that point, now will it? JcS I didn't come back to this three months after posting it, but we've had enough time to see how my observations and predictions went. 1. The 50th did seem to be a bit like the 25 or 40 year mark, with the exception of the magazines at the newsstand with the Fabs on the cover. I think there was more of it this time than in years past. 2. Banking on the US catalog to be the catalyst was a mistake. 3. These albums did not chart nearly as well as I thought they would--given how few units have to move these days in order to get a good placement, that had to be a disappointment at Capitol/Apple. Yet the type of thing that could have perhaps generated more interest--LET IT BE on DVD, for instance--would not have fit with the overall theme of the first appearance in the USA. 4. They did fall off the charts in a hurry. JcS
|
|