Welsh Rich Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 There's been some discussion about the "reworked" Beatles stuff in the Now Playing thread... I'm not sure about it all, I don't see the need for this embelished songs. Especially as most of the reviews have focused on how good they sound compared with the actual songs themselves. Anyway - this is an interesting article from The Times about why they might have chosen to do it... IT Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Stars on 45 (known in some countries as Starsound) were a Dutch novelty pop act that was briefly very popular in the UK, Europe and the U.S. in the very early 1980s. The band, which consisted solely of studio session musicians under the direction of Jaap Eggermont, formerly of Golden Earring, popularised the medley, by recreating hit songs as faithfully as possible and stringing them together, with a common tempo and relentless underlying drum track. The point was to provide a danceable disco record which used familiar tunes. Eggermont originally created the "Stars on 45" concept after hearing a bootleg 12-inch dance record called "Let's Do It In the 80's" and credited to the band Passion. The record actually used original recordings of songs by the Beatles, the Buggles, the Archies and Madness, and used a segment of "Venus," a recording by Shocking Blue, for which Eggermont held a copyright. With the bootleg recording circulating in dance clubs, Eggermont decided to create a licensed version of the medley by using soundalike artists to replicate the original hits. The Beatles soundalikes were established Dutch singers. John Lennon's parts were sung by Bas Muys of the group Smile. The other two singers were the famous Sandy Coast frontman Hans Vermeulen and Okkie Huysdens who worked with Vermeulen in Rainbow Train. Apart from the recreated songs, an original chorus and hook was added at intervals to help string differing sections together. The lyrics and a MIDI rendition of the most successful single can be read/heard here. The first such release, "Stars on 45 Medley", featuring songs from The Beatles, went to Number 1 in the US, and Number 2 in the UK, and several follow up records did well too. Another album followed, featuring medleys using the songs of ABBA and Motown. A third album featured medleys of The Rolling Stones and Stevie Wonder. The single "Stars on 45 III A Tribute to Stevie Wonder", peaked at US# 28 in 1982. There was a touring company also called Stars on 45 that promoted their albums (although not using the same studio session musicians as on the record). In 1982, there was a staged musical show at the Huntington Hartford Theater in Hollywood, CA and a video of that show was released in 1983 by MCA Home Video. The '45' in the title refers to the playback speed of a vinyl record single Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 There's been some discussion about the "reworked" Beatles stuff in the Now Playing thread... I'm not sure about it all, I don't see the need for this embelished songs. Especially as most of the reviews have focused on how good they sound compared with the actual songs themselves. Anyway - this is an interesting article from The Times about why they might have chosen to do it...As I noted previously, the answer to "why" has everything to do with Cirque du Soleil. The Beatles people and the Cirque people decided to collaborate on a show, and it was decided that rather than simply rolling out a series of unaltered Beatles songs, they needed to create a unique soundtrack for the show. Why the article referenced above never mentions Cirque, I'm not sure. As for "how good they sound," that's just a measure of how well the original recordings cleaned up in this new process. The songs on this disc are not better than the originals -- they just sound better, because they've been given a fresh remastering. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jimmyjimmy Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Why the article referenced above never mentions Cirque, I'm not sure. It touches upon it..Sir George Martin Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Welsh Rich Posted November 22, 2006 Author Share Posted November 22, 2006 As for "how good they sound," that's just a measure of how well the original recordings cleaned up in this new process. The songs on this disc are not better than the originals -- they just sound better, because they've been given a fresh remastering. I suppose this is another discussion, slightly off topic here, about brushing up old recordings. I don't think the old Beatles stuff sounds bad at all, it's a product of it's time, that's how it sounds... Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 I suppose this is another discussion, slightly off topic here, about brushing up old recordings. I don't think the old Beatles stuff sounds bad at all, it's a product of it's time, that's how it sounds...The original CD transfers, though good for their time, are a bit flat. A remastering is long overdue. I don't think that has much to do with being "a product of its time" -- remastering just means the CD will sound better -- truer to the original master tapes. We're not talking about a remix here -- just a remaster. I think the author of that article confuses the two terms. I'm hopeful that we'll get a deluxe remastered series of reissues soon, with better packaging and liner notes, the whole works. That's money I will gladly spend. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
solace Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 The original CD transfers, though good for their time, are a bit flat. A remastering is long overdue. I don't think that has much to do with being "a product of its time" -- remastering just means the CD will sound better -- truer to the original master tapes. We're not talking about a remix here -- just a remaster. I think the author of that article confuses the two terms. I'm hopeful that we'll get a deluxe remastered series of reissues soon, with better packaging and liner notes, the whole works. That's money I will gladly spend.or just find and download the Dr. Ebbett's transfer versions Quote Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 or just find and download the Dr. Ebbett's transfer versions I've seen those floating around on various sites. Can you give me a quick idea of what they're all about? I think I've seen both mono and stereo mixes. Do you recommend any particular Ebbetts versions (certain albums)? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Les Paul Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 I bought it and it is good. But being a HUGE fan of anything Beatles related, I felt I had to buy it. If you own the anthology series you already have all the snippets used by Sir George and his son. What really irks me though is that the damn thing won't even play in my computer ! I can see maybe making it so you can't rip to iTunes but it won't allow my computer to even recognize it ! The 5.1 DVD doesn't work either. Seems a bit ridiculous to me. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 I've seen those floating around on various sites. Can you give me a quick idea of what they're all about? I think I've seen both mono and stereo mixes. Do you recommend any particular Ebbetts versions (certain albums)? http://www.fabfour.de/drebbet.htmI think he is like Owsley Stanley III, a mysteriso dude. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
jff Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 I heard part of one song on the radio last week. I thought it sounded pretty good. Seems like a pretty interesting concept to me. Funny that this has been roundly criticised, but the rap/white album mash-up was an internet sensation. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted November 22, 2006 Share Posted November 22, 2006 Funny that this has been roundly criticised, but the rap/white album mash-up was an internet sensation. I think the fact that it was free had a lot to do with it. Plus it was far more interesting to listen to than this. Oh, and the fact that Danger Mouse knows what he's doing with regard to that method of making music. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.