The Beatles' Definitive CD Versions: The 1964 Singles

KOMM, GIB MIR DEINE HAND

In 1964, German record label execs were complaining that they can't have ideal sales on s ongs sung in English, so to comply with their requests, George Martin had The Beatles record their two biggest hits to date, "I Want To Hold Your Hand" and "She Loves You," in German. The group was on a short break in Paris during a tour and protested having to do this task for such a trivial reason on their day off, but who's going to defy George Martin's wishes? While they were at it, the guys also recorded "Can't Buy Me Love." The two German songs were released as a single in Germany, which is why I included it in the "1964 Singles" post.

The "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand" vocals were overdubbed onto the "I Want To Hold Your Hand" multitracks. The lyrics were provided by a couple of Germanophones (is that a real world?) EMI outsourced; not only were the lyrics translated, but they were also changed so that there'd be a rhyme scheme in the new German version. (Indeed, do you remember the English lyrics ever saying "Oh, you are so pretty, pretty as a diamond"?)

There are two mixes: a mono mix and a stereo mix. On the stereo mix, the backing track is panned hard-left, while the vocals and handclaps are panned hard-right. Many fans have taken the "I Want To Hold Your Hand" stereo backing track as extracted from the Anthology DVD's 5.1 soundtrack and synched it up to the "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand" vocal track to get a stereo version of the song with centered vocals; you can actually find my attempt on one of the Tuned To A Natural E compilations.

Now, let's talk about that music, shall we?

MONO VERSIONS:
PM87:
Interesting; I don't remember it sounding this bad before; then again, I've been listening to the Something New version ever since The Capitol Albums came out. Bad EQ. Also, it sounds like the tape "breathes" in some places, know what I mean?

CAPITOL (mono):
The Something New mono version is actually a really good track. The EQ is good, with enough emphasis on the bass and the treble to make it a really exciting piece of music. As for the mix itself, there's a great balance of all the instruments and vocals. The vocals are actually pretty dry, which surprised me because I'm so used to hearing them reverbed. There might be a tape glitch or two, but not enough to affect one's enjoyment of the song.

MM:
Take all the treble out of the Something New version, press it to a record, wear the record out severely, and you have, unfortunately, the 2009 Mono Masters reissue. It vocals are very distorted, and the equalization leaves much to be desired. I dunno, maybe I have a bad CD or something? But at least I didn't notice any tape glitches. Basically, this is the 1987 version but with vocal distortion.

STEREO VERSIONS:
CAPITOL (stereo):
Extremely bright sound. Unfortunately, the vocals are too loud, especially in the headphones. At the very beginning of the track, you can hear a voice (McCartney's?) and some whispering. There's a lot of hiss on this track; I'm guessing that The Beatles overdubbed their German vocals on a copy of the original multitracks, meaning there's one generation of analog tape lost, and of course most (if not all) of the Capitol albums were mastered from copies of the British masters, which means yet another generation of tape loss on this track, so it's understandable that there's noticeable hiss.

PM09:
Again with the bad mastering on the 2009 version -- what the heck?! The left channel sounds noise-reduced beyond all recognition, and there's just no equalization to speak of; it's all middle. The vocals sound a bit distorted, but not as distorted as on MM.

Worst mono version: Mono Masters
Uck. That's all I can say. Uck.

Best mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1
If you thought the 2004 box set releases of the American albums were unnecessary, you were sorely mistaken. Because of The Capitol Albums, we have a good-sounding version of "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand."

Worst stereo version: Past Masters (2009)
I guess the German songs were considered a novelty or something; why else did they obviously get no care and attention on the reissue campaign?

Definitive CD version of "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand": The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1 (mono)
The bright EQ, nice balance, and the intact excitement make the version from the mono Something New win out. The EQ easily puts it over the top against the 1987 and 2009 issues. As for mono over stereo? Quite simply, the stereo mix isn't balanced very well at all.

---

SIE LIEBT DICH

I don't care what any of the fan sites' conspiracy theories say, The Beatles rerecorded the backing track for this song because the "She Loves You" multitracks simply no longer existed; they were stolen, erased, or just plain lost, depending on whom you believe. If you don't believe me that the backing tracks are different, just listen -- it's very obvious. If you still don't believe me, refer to your Mark Lewisohn book.

Now...in Germany, this was the B-side of "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand." "Sie Liebt Dich" was nowhere to be found in England in 1964 as a domestic product. In the United States, though, it found its way onto a Swan single, with "I'll Get You" on the B-side. You see, Swan argued that they had the right to release "She Loves You" on a single, and the label argued that because "Sie Liebt Dich" is the same song (just in a different language), then they had the right to release it as a single. However, the folks at Swan obviously didn't feel like arguing that logic to the blokes at EMI, as there's no record that they ever asked for a copy of the master, and in fact the Swan single was a copy of an Odeon record from Germany -- which is why Swan's release of "Sie Liebt Dich" didn't sound terribly good! I do believe EMI issued a cease and desist to Swan, saying that Swan had the right to release the master of "She Loves You" as a single -- "Sie Liebt Dich" obviously was not the "She Loves You" master!

The next time we got to hear the song in the States was in 1980, on a Capitol Records compilation called Rarities, which included a stereo mix of the song. As with "Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand," the stereo mix of "Sie Liebt Dich" pans the backing track to the left and the vocals to the right.

MONO VERSION:
MM:
There's definitely some emphasis on the bass on this version. In fact, the lows sound distorted, and the vocals sound distorted. No audible tape glitches; however, in some parts of the song, it sounds like the recording was mastered from a record, but in other parts the sound is pretty clean. The EQ definitely could benefit from some treble.

STEREO VERSIONS:
PM87:
What? You thought this was a mono version? Because it says that in the liner notes? And it sounds like mono to you? Well, apparently this is actually a very, very tight stereo mix. Sounds like mono to me. Oh well. EQ is okay, but it sounds like there are a lot of tape glitches. Actually, the last "Ooooooooooh!" does sound like it's isolated to the left channel.

PM09:
Definitely has a full, wide stereo separation. The instruments are hard-left, and the vocals are hard-right. The EQ is much better than on both MM and PM87, the vocals are much cleaner than on MM, and the tape glitches present on PM87 are gone here.

Worst version: Mono Masters
Because it's debatable as to whether the 1987 version is stereo or mono, I'm not doing a best/worst mono/stereo here. MM has absolutely the worst sound, period. The bass and vocals are darn near unlistenably distorted, and the equalization is terrible.

Definitive CD version of "Sie Liebt Dich": Past Masters (2009)
Bright sound throughout, no tape glitches, and no distortion. Yeah, the stereo separation makes for awkward listening -- especially with headphones -- but it's definitely the most enjoyable version.

---

I FEEL FINE

Yeah, yeah, accidental feedback, blah blah blah...but I hesitate to call it "feedback." True guitar feedback is definitely not anything like what's at the beginning of "I Feel Fine." I think what happened, rather, was that the plucking of Paul's A string on his bass was picked up by the A string on one of the other guitars, and because the two strings were perfectly in tune with each other, the 6-string's A-string started vibrating and ergo audibly sounded. That's not feedback, my friends. That's just plain cool. It's also what makes it possible for the human voice to break glass. But whatever caused this avant garde opening to happen, it certainly contributed greatly to what arguably could be considered a Perfect Beatles Song.

Yeah, it's great that September 9, 2009 saw the remastering of The Beatles' canonical catalog, but we still don't have the "whisper" version of "I Feel Fine" -- that is, the version that appeared on the European releases of the "red" album and on which you can hear some whispering before any music starts. Most references specify that it was the British version, but I have a red vinyl pressing from France that has the whispering at the beginning. Anyhoo....

MONO VERSIONS:
SINGLE:
It sounds to me as if the version in the singles box (which, I assume, is the same version used to press the original UK single) were mastered with A.M. radio in mind. I'm not saying this is a bad thing -- in fact, there's something exciting about this song. You can almost feel how exciting it was to hear this song coming out of a transistor radio. It's an amazingly clean recording; you can hear each instrument very distinctively. Yeah, there could be some more treble, but it's a damn fine recording nonetheless.

EP:
Sounds like there's less reverb in the intro. Definitely more bass than on the single version, maybe a bit more treble. Nice recording. Sounds like it might have been mastered with the home listener in mind rather than the A.M. radio listener, know what I mean? I guess you could say it sounds a bit more danceable than the single version.

CAPITOL (mono):
Holy reverb, Batman; The Fab Four must have recorded this in a cavern! Okay, this is one song from which Dave Dexter's engineering goons really should have stayed away. I don't know how to explain it, but the reverb makes this song sound less...real. Less honest. Think of a rainy day in New York City; that's what this version sounds like.

CAPITOL (fake stereo):
Oh, dear God, what did The Beatles do to deserve the hack job that Capitol did on this? And how dare they call it "stereo"?! Forgive Dave Dexter and his staff, Lord; they knew not what they did. Actually, scratch that -- please don't forgive them. Ouch. High/low fake stereo plus duophonic echo delay plus excessive reverb equals cheapening of The Beatles equals unhappy Sean. (Excuse me while I go clean out my ears, now; this bad fake stereo made my earwax run.)

MM:
*Whew!* Much better. This is by far the cleanest-sounding mono version, in that it's definitely not laden with noise reduction, no noticeable tape glitches, just very clean. You can actually hear the plectrum strike the strings on John's guitar right at the end of the instrumental break. However, the equalization needs help. As usual, more treble, please. The bass is pretty cool, though.

STEREO VERSIONS:
PM87:
Nice clean recording, could use a bit more EQ balance. "I Feel Fine" definitely sounds cool in stereo. I do wish the drums were a bit louder. The lead guitar overpowers everything during the instrumental break.

RED:
The vocals sound a bit brighter than on PM87. Lead guitar is still a bit overpowering, and I'm severely underwhelmed by the drums.

1:
The 1 version sounds incredibly bright and clean from the beginning. The bass is a little more pronounced than before. Drums are, thankfully, more audible; the overall stereo balance is a little better than on prior stereo CD releases. Brightness all around. John's vocals are so clear you can actually hear the saliva -- whether that's good or bad is up to you!

PM09:
Certainly an improvement over PM87 and the red album, but not over 1. The equalization isn't as good, and there's noticeably more hiss from the beginning and lasting all the way through. The balance isn't that great -- the vocals overpower the song, and most of the backing instruments are hard to hear; the exceptions, as usual, being John's and George's guitars.

Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1 (fake stereo)
Maybe it was Dave Dexter taking out his frustration on The Beatles? After all, he didn't want to sign them. Brian Epstein went over his head to his boss. That's the only logical explanation I can think of: revenge.

Best mono version: The Compact Disc EP Collection
Barely edging out Mono Masters, this version has the best overall sound, with the excitement jumping out quite well.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters Vol. 1 (1987)
Not the best sound in the world, and the guitars are too overpowering.

Best stereo version: 1
Best equalization, cleanest sound, and good balance of instruments plus vocals.

Definitive CD version of "I Feel Fine": 1
Hands-down, noticeably the best version all around.

---

SHE'S A WOMAN

The "I Feel Fine" / "She's A Woman" single combination is one of several that exemplifies an amazing pairing of John Lennon and Paul McCartney each saying the same thing in their own ways; if not lyrically, then musically. We had similar pairings with "Paperback Writer" and "Rain," "Hey Jude" and "Revolution," and perhaps most strikingly, "Penny Lane" and "Strawberry Fields Forever." This, ladies and gentleman, is a hell of a combo.

That's all I need to say, except that if you're an obsessive collector, there's an interesting outtake of "She's A Woman" on Unsurpassed Masters Vol. 2 that will make you think that Robert Plant took over the vocals at one point.

MONO VERSIONS:
SINGLE:
Right away I didn't care much for the sound. The intro chords sounded as if they were coming from a Hills Bros. coffee can. When the body of the song kicks in, though, the sound is a bit better, with a great bass line. As with many mono singles, it sounds as if it were mastered with A.M. radio in mind. Not the best EQ, but there is an overall good balance of all instruments and vocals.

CAPITOL (mono):
Again with the reverb, Capitol, what the hell?! EQ needs help, too -- too much high and middle, not enough low. All the reverb tends to drown out the piano. During the first refrain, somehow the vocals are noticeably overpowered; probably again blurred by the reverb.

CAPITOL (fake stereo):
Dave Dexter was a murderer; his engineers hit men. Need I say more?

MM:
This would be an amazing listen, if it only were for more treble in the equalization. It also sounds severely noise-reduced.

STEREO VERSIONS:
PM87:
Again, could use a bit more EQ balance. Interestingly, the vocals sound most affected by poor EQ. Most of the instruments and vocals balance nicely, but the maracas are too loud, and the piano is too quiet.

EP:
From the stereo bonus EP from the EP box, that is. The overall sound is a huge improvement over PM87. Also, we get something that's not on any other CD version legally released: a count-in. Maracas are still too loud and piano too soft, but still a good listening experience.

PM09:
Certainly the loudest-mastered of all the version, but still pretty good sound. The EQ isn't as good as on the EP version, but the sound itself is crisper and cleaner. The maracas aren't overpowering, and the piano is actually at a nice level.

Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1 (fake stereo)
Yuck. I think when it's my time to go, the first thing I'll do is find Dave Dexter and asked why, oh why he felt it necessary to slaughter a classic.

Best mono version: The Complete Singles Collection
Mono Masters would have won if it didn't sound so noise-reduced.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters Vol. 1 (1987)
Did people not believe in equalization?

Best stereo version: Past Masters (2009)
What put this over the top was the clean sound and even balance of all the elements of the song.

Definitive CD version of "She's A Woman": Past Masters (2009)
I think the mono version itself is more exciting, but the only way I could imagine that winning this contest is if you had a playback system that enables you to crank up the treble -- it truly is exciting. However, since not everybody has that luxury, I have to go with the version that sounds the best without any tweaking. The new Past Masters version wins.

The Beatles' Definitive CD Versions: The 1963 Singles

So, I finally get a chance to analyze The Beatles' 1963 output in singles. It took a while, mainly because most of the single tracks have appeared on numerous Beatles CDs. Just to give you an idea of what I was dealing with, I have roughly a 45-minute commute home using the local mass transit system. Well, I worked on part of this project on the way home, and listening to "She Loves You" alone took almost the entire train ride. And I'm sure that if I had the headphones turned up loud enough, whoever was sitting next to me must have been ready to kill me.

For this round, I dealt with the following Beatles singles:

• "From Me To You" b/w "Thank You, Girl"
• "She Loves You" b/w "I'll Get You"
• "I Want To Hold Your Hand" b/w "This Boy"

You may have noticed I left out "Please Please Me" b/w "Ask Me Why." I'll cover these when I take care of the Please Please Me album. But the six single tracks have been released on several different CD releases over the years; here's a guide to them and abbreviations I'll be using to keep things nice and tight:

• PM87 - Past Masters, Vol. 1, compiled in 1987 and released in 1988 to include Beatles tracks that didn't appear on the canonical album catalog.


• SINGLE - The Complete Singles Collection, a box set from 1992 that compiled all the Beatles' singles on mini-CDs, complete with reproductions of the picture sleeves.


• EP - The Compact Disc EP Collection, just like the singles box but a compilation of EPs. The EPs that are apropos to this installment of my obsessive analysis are The Beatles' Hits, The Beatles' Million Sellers, and a "bonus" EP included in the set of stereo mixes, simply titled The Beatles.


• RED - the "red album," officially called 1962-1966 and sold as a two-CD set in 1993 despite the ability to easily fit the entire contents on one CD.


• CAPITOL (mono) - mono mixes from The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1 from 2004. Albums within this set that apply to this entry are Meet The Beatles! and The Beatles' Second Album.


• CAPITOL (fake stereo) - Back in the '60s, if a stereo mix wasn't available for a song, engineers would apply crazy EQ and other effects to simulate stereo, and the result was usually atrocious. The "fake stereo" designation will refer to any tracks from The Capitol Albums from the "stereo" albums but are really processed mono. When I compare "best mono," "best stereo," etc. versions, anything that's actually fake stereo will be considered mono.
  
• CAPITOL (stereo) - if you can't figure out what I mean by this after reading my explanations for the other two Capitol designations, then you really need to put down the joint and come back after you sober up.


• 1 - the 2000 album that compiled the officially-recognized #1 hits from The Beatles in both the U.S. and U.K. Beatles fans the world over knew this album would be a huge flop (case in point: 1982's 20 Greatest Hits). Check the RIAA site to see what a flop it was.


• MM - Mono Masters, the mono equivalent to Past Masters found in the box set The Beatles In Mono.


• PM09 - Past Masters, 2009 edition, the two-volume remastered version.

Now, on to the music:

---

From Me To You

I don't have much to say about "From Me To You," so I'll just get into a little bit of history here.

The song was first released as a single in 1963. In the UK, it came out on Parlophone with "Thank You, Girl" as the B-side. Vee-Jay (who, at the time, was The Beatles' label in the States, after Capitol turned down "Please Please Me" and Vee-Jay had accepted it) released "From Me To You" as a single around the same time. Interestingly, Vee-Jay released it as the B-side of "Please Please Me." And here in the United States, "From Me To You" (as performed by The Beatles, at least -- Del Shannon also released a cover of it) made its worldwide album debut on an album called Jolly What! The Beatles With Frank Ifield On Stage, an album that was recorded neither "on stage" nor with The Beatles performing with Frank Ifield -- it was a compilation (or, as the liner notes to the album actually said, "copulation" -- don't believe me? Check Snopes) of four Beatles songs to which Vee-Jay owned the U.S. rights, and the rest of the album was filled out with Frank Ifield tunes. While many fans were smart enough in the '60s to not buy this obvious rip-off, they're kicking themselves now for turning away an album that today is worth thousands of dollars.

"From Me To You" basically has two distinct versions. The mono version has a harmonica playing over the intro, while the stereo version does not. In the mono version's harmonica intro, the vocals are fighting with the harmonica for attention; it's just a bad balance. And the harmonica also really renders the lead guitar useless. But what's interesting is that, as on Please Please Me and With The Beatles, you can hear Ringo's bass drum pedal squeak. I haven't been able to hear that on the stereo versions.

Mono Versions
PM87:
Really, the sound is very harsh at first, with too much high and middle but not enough bass. Not a good listening experience.

SINGLE:
Sounds exactly the same as PM87.

EP:
Sounds no different from the prior two mono versions, just a bit quieter; MAYBE less harsh.

RED:
First of all, I find it odd that the CD reissue of the "red" album has the mono version, while all the non-CD releases have always had the stereo version. On the CD version of the red album, the bass is more audible than on the prior CD mono releases, but the vocals sound a bit more distorted on this version.

1:
The bass is more audible than on PM87, single, and EP, but not quite as audible as on Red. The vocals aren't distorted, either.

MM:
The 2009 mono release is similar to the 1987 version, but cleaner and brighter. I found myself wishing that there were more bass, though. At the end of the song, the vocals seem to be at war with the harmonica.

Worst mono version: Past Masters, Vol. 1 (1987)
Just plain bad sound.

Best mono version: 1
Quite simply, this version has the best EQ and overall sound clarity.

Stereo Version
PM09:
Hmmm...so far the stereo version was only released on one CD to this date. But on this CD, the sound is incredibly clear. The acoustic guitar really rings out. One caveat, though, is that the overall sound is not the best balance due to the odd stereo separation -- most rhythm instruments are in the left, with some acoustic guitar in right, vocals in the right, and the harmonica centered. The stereo mix also makes it very clear that the intro is an edit piece (which I always knew, actually, thanks to Mark Lewisohn's book and, of course, the fine folks at Yellow Dog who gave us Unsurpassed Masters Vol. 1), as the vocals are centered during the intro, then suddenly panned right for the rest of the song.

Definitive CD version of "From Me To You": Past Masters (2009)
There was something I always loved about the reverb on the stereo version. It's hard to describe, but it sounds different from any other reverb that I've heard on any other Beatles song. Plus, the sound on the stereo Past Masters is very clean; really, you'd think it was mastered by Paul's grandfather.

---

Thank You, Girl

Not much to say here, other than there are basically two versions: the mono version and the stereo version. As with "From Me To You," the difference is in the harmonica. However, exactly the opposite of "From Me To You": the stereo version has some harmonica parts that are missing in the mono version. Personally, I find the mono mix of "Thank You, Girl" to sound a bit anemic without those extra harmonica parts.

Mono Versions
PM87:
It sounds to me like there is an obscene amount of noise reduction on this version, so much that the reverb on the vocals is virtually gone. The mastering just sounds lifeless. Sounds like there's a tape glitch between "good to be true" and the next verse. There's an audible (and badly-timed) edit before the "oh" coda -- right after the harmonica.

EP:
This slightly newer version still sounds noise-reduced, but not quite as harshly. The EQ is better, perhaps the reason I noticed what might be an edit right before the words "I know, little girl..."

SINGLE:
You'd think this would be the same version that's in the EP box, but I don't think it is. I heard less bass in the single version, unfortunately. But this version makes it a little clearer that that is an edit right before "I know, little girl..." Something sounds like an edit or tape glitch in the phrase "would doubt our love," and I hear yet another before "That's the kind of love" - and even another after that line! And maybe even another edit before the last verse.

CAPITOL (mono)
There's a lot of reverb on this version. It almost sounds like it's coming from an A.M. radio! Interestingly, we hear the harmonica in the "way that you do" and "good to be true" call-and-responses as well as in the very end, but we're not supposed to hear those harmonica parts in mono; therefore, this is obviously a fold-down of the stereo mix, especially because "Thank You Girl" was never released on a single in the U.S. at this point, so Capitol might never have been sent a mono version. It also appears that the ending "Oh" refrains are different from the prior versions, as the edit audible in those versions isn't noticeable here, and the harmonica playing sounds a bit different. And one other difference I noticed is that during the second verse on the line "Only a fool would doubt our love," Lennon and McCartney disagree on the lyric: one sings "could," the other sings "would."

MM:
Sounds noise-reduced (this could be where some of the five minutes of noise reduction in the 2009 remasters comes in), but the EQ is better than on PM87. I really wish there were a bit more bass, but at least there's a bit of treble.

Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1
Partly because it sounds like it was recorded in a can of sardines, and partly because it's a fake mono mix, in that Dave Dexter's goons just took the stereo mix and combined the two channels to make a mono version. Boooooooo!

Best mono version: The Compact Disc EP Collection
Best EQ overall and with the least amount of distracting noise and tape glitches.

Stereo Versions
CAPITOL (stereo)
Okay, the overall sound is just plain harsh. The EQ isn't all that great, and there's too much extra reverb. Not good! Also, the playback is slow and makes the song drag a bit.

PM09:
Much cleaner stereo mix than Capitol's. Still not great, but much more enjoyable.

Definitive CD version of "Thank You, Girl": Past Masters (2009)
But admittedly, not by far. I think the overall balance sounds better on the mono mix, but the stereo version sounds cleaner, brighter, and has the harmonica parts that make the sound as a whole complete.

---

She Loves You

Not much to say about this classic that most people already don't know. It was released in the UK and the US in 1963. Dave Dexter at Capitol turned down "She Loves You" and decided that Frank Ifield's "Confessin'" would be much more suitable for the American public. This was during a time when Vee-Jay was in deep trouble with EMI, so "She Loves You" was not offered to Vee-Jay; instead, it was offered to an even smaller label called Swan, based in Philadelphia and had ties to Dick Clark. The agreement was that Swan would have single rights to the masters for "She Loves You" and "I'll Get You." That's it. No album rights, just single rights.

There are no true stereo versions of "She Loves You." Depending on what source you wish to believe, the original unmixed session tapes were either lost, erased, or stolen, so as of 2010, it is physically impossible to make a true stereo mix of the song. However, it's clear that different releases of the song came from different edits. And there are many edits in "She Loves You."

PM87:
The sound is noticeably hissy, but the EQ is good. There are easily audible edits during the guitar riffs before every verse. There's also an edit right before first "ooooooooooh!" Each version of "She Loves You" has an edit either right on or shortly before the word "pride." On PM87, the edit comes right on the word "pride," and at this point the treble noticeably increases. Then there is another edit between the following "she loves you" and "and you know that can't be bad," and the treble decreases to the level it was originally; the difference in EQ is night and day. Overall the sound isn't bad, but the changes in EQ are distracting.

SINGLE:
This version is still hissy, but it has better EQ than PM87. The edits during guitar riffs in first and second verses are still audible, but the edit is either not there or inaudible before the first "ooooooooooh!" There may or may not be an edit during guitar riff before third verse on this version; if there is an edit, it's pretty seamless. The "pride" edit here comes before the word "pride" and is much smoother than on PM87, and as with PM87, the treble significantly increases at this point. The same edit and EQ change between "she loves you" "and you know that can't be bad" is even more noticeable than on PM87. The sound is generally cleaner when the recording is taken as a whole.

EP:
Sounds exactly the same as the single to me.

RED:
The sound on this release is a bit cleaner than before, with good EQ and less hiss and sibilance. The edit during guitar riff at the beginning of the first verse is smoother than usual, and as with the single and EP versions, the "ooooooooooh!" edit is still inaudible. The single and EP "pride" edit and EQ anomaly are still there.

1:
Sounds like Red but with even less hissj; really good sound. The "pride" edit happens before the word "pride" -- and it's a bad edit. The equalization changes at this point as usual, but this time the middle-range frequencies increase rather than the highs. On the following "Because she loves you," the EQ changes again, but for the worse. Actually, forget what I said about "really good sound" -- it sucks from this point until the end of the song.

CAPITOL (mono):
The EQ isn't as bright as on the prior CD versions -- more middle, less high. Bass might have a bit more emphasis than on the prior versions. The guitar riff edit before the third verse is really bad. The "pride" edit happens before the word "pride," but interestingly, the EQ doesn't go out of whack and stays consistent through the whole song.

CAPITOL (fake stereo):
The EQ is actually really good, and one can argue that the EQ actually does give the illusion of a stereo recording. However, the vocals sound strange, almost as if they have artificial double-tracking. In fact, this recording might have been severely processed -- high/low fake stereo plus "duophonic," perhaps -- there might be a slight, barely noticeable echo delay in one channel. The "pride" edit sounds different from Capitol mono, interestingly -- sounds like it's ON the word "pride," as on PM87. And as with Capitol mono, the EQ remains consistent throughout whole song. If it weren't for the "duophonic" tampering, so far this version would win out on EQ. Lots of hiss, though; undoubtedly from a lower-generation tape than the UK versions.

MM:
The EQ isn't that great -- not much in terms of highs. There's a bit more emphasis on the bass than before. I can hear a few tape glitches in the beginning. The guitar riff edits in the beginnings of the first and second verses are smoother than usual, but the riff edit before the third verse is atrocious. The "pride" edit falls on the word "pride" as in PM87 and Capitol fake stereo. The EQ does noticeably change a bit, then back again, but it's not nearly as atrocious as before.

PM09:
Seems to be the same as MM, except I heard only one tape glitch in the beginning. I noticed an edit before the first "and you know you should be glad." The guitar riff edits in the first and second verse are smooth, as is the edit before the first "ooooooooooh!" The edit during the guitar riff that introduces the third verse is pretty bad. However, unlike with most other versions, the "pride" edit is very smooth. At this point there's a very slight change in EQ, making Ringo's cymbals sound louder, but it returns to normal in a few seconds.

Worst version: 1
The sudden EQ change on the "pride" edit, resulting in the sound being severely marred for the remainder of the song, make this probably the least-desirable CD version of "She Loves You."

Definitive CD version of "She Loves You": Past Masters (2009)
I think I had to judge this one on cleanliness. The various versions of "She Loves You" sound good, but unfortunately not great. Also, this one has the smoothest edits and the least drastic changes in equalization after the "pride" edit.

---

I'll Get You

This is a good counterpart to the A-side, what with the "Oh yeah" refrains to match the "Yeah, yeah, yeah" refrains of "She Loves You." Not much more to say, except I've always loved Lennon's vocal flub during the phrase "change your mind." As with "She Loves You," the unmixed session tapes are gone, so there are only mono and fake stereo versions.

PM87:
The sound quality is mediocre. The equalization consists mostly of middles; not much in lows and highs. Sounds like it was mixed specifically for AM radio -- which it very well may have been. Either that or it was noise-reduced to hell.

SINGLE:
Slightly more treble than on PM87. There might be an edit right before "Well, there's gonna be a time." Lennon's vocal error is not as noticeable, interestingly.

CAPITOL (mono):
Sounds like PM87 but with additional reverb, bringing the sound more "in your face." Mastering sounds louder, too, as do the harmonica parts.

CAPITOL (fake stereo):
As with "She Loves You," the EQ in general actually doesn't sound too bad. However, the left channel is too bassy.

MM:
The EQ is better than PM87, but not not as good as single. Bass is a bit more audible, but not very punchy. Really lacking in treble. The edit heard on single version is noticeable here, too.

PM09:
This version is mastered slightly louder here than on MM. George's guitar is slightly more noticeable than on other versions. The bass is slightly louder than before.

Overall, there isn't really a great-sounding version of "I'll Get You," which is a shame because it's a good song. I'd love to have a version that has the EQ of the Capitol fake stereo with the cleanliness of the single version.

Worst version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1
The EQ leaves much to be desired, and the extra reverb doesn't help, nor does the relative loudness.

Definitive CD version of "I'll Get You": The CD Singles Collection
But not by far, honestly.

---

I Want To Hold Your Hand

The importance of "I Want To Hold Your Hand" cannot be overstated, no matter how hard you try. At the very least, it was a technical turning point for The Beatles, as it was the first song they recorded on four-track tape. At the second-least, the song changed the world.

The Beatles were already hitting it big throughout Europe by the time the song was first released over there in 1963, as "She Loves You" was a massive hit, as was "Please Please Me." Both songs were rejected by Capitol Records, EMI's United States record label who had the right of first refusal of all foreign product from another EMI label.

And "I Want To Hold Your Hand" was the fourth Beatles song that Dave Dexter, Jr., who was in charge of that foreign product, rejected. It took Brian Epstein going over Dexter's head to Alan Livingston -- and a threat from Livingston's wife -- to get "I Want To Hold Your Hand" released in the United States. Meanwhile, a young girl in Washington, D.C., asked a local DJ why we couldn't have songs like "She Loves You" in the United States. When presented with a Parlophone copy of "I Want To Hold Your Hand," the DJ invited the girl on the air to introduce the song, which was to be played for the first time in the United States. Capitol releases the song, and the rest is the world as we know it.

It was an honor to listen to nine (whoa!) versions of this song back-to-back for this project. (Thank you, Mrs. Livingston, wherever you are!)

Mono Versions
SINGLE:
A very exciting, very punchy version. The bass is just right! Admittedly, the EQ could use some additional treble. The lead guitar riff at the end is drowned out.

EP:
Better EQ than the single -- good amount of treble, but slightly less bass than on the single. The song is still exciting, nonetheless. The extra treble means a little bit of hiss, but it's not distracting at all.

CAPITOL (mono):
This version is mastered a bit louder than before, but the EQ is slightly better than EP -- nice balance of lows, middles, and highs, although the treble could be boosted just a tiny bit. Definitely an exciting recording to listen to. It sounds like there are tape glitches in various places in the song. Still, it's a surprisingly clean-sounding recording for what must be at least a generation away from the UK pressings.

CAPITOL (fake stereo):
- The mix on the stereo pressing of Meet The Beatles! is actually rechanneled mono, with lows on the left, highs on the right. There might be a slight duophonic effect as well. The processing does nothing to improve the sound. In fact, Capitol's reprocessing makes it sound like the Beatles were singing this in a natatorium.

MM:
Sounds like Capitol mono or maybe even the single version, but not mastered as loudly. Nice sound, but there's still something about it that's not quite what it could be; perhaps it's noise reduction?

Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1
That is, the so-called "stereo" version from Meet The Beatles! The "Dexterization" absolutely adds nothing.

Best mono version: The Compact Disc EP Collection
Taken from The Beatles' Million Sellers. Nice EQ, nice mix, almost makes me want to get up and dance -- and let me tell ya, I do not dance.

Stereo Versions
PM87:
Not a good mix at all. The rhythm instruments are all in the left channel, maybe slightly panned toward center (or perhaps it's the vocal/clap track centered with headphone leakage?), while the lead guitar is in the right channel. And the lead guitar is mixed farther forward than the rest of the instruments, making it sound as if this is a "vocals-up" mix. The EQ is OK but not great. This version of the song just doesn't have any real bang to it.

RED:
Sounds like PM87, but with a bit more bass. Lead guitar is still a bit too far forward in the right channel. The EQ is slightly improved.

1:
The EQ is a bit improved, even slightly more than Red. The vocals still overpower the song, but not as badly as on PM87. Lead guitar is still panned all the way to the right, but it's not as distracting as on PM87.

PM09:
Good bass in the EQ, but could use a tiny bit more treble. PM09 probably has the best stereo balance, as the rhythm instruments seem to be more in line with the vocals and lead guitar, although the vocals still overpower a bit. This is definitely the most energetic-sounding stereo version that has been released on CD so far. Oh...and did I detect an extra falsetto harmony during the last "I can't hide"?!

Worst stereo version: Past Masters Vol. 1 (1987)
Just a lifeless recording with vocals and lead guitar that are way too loud.

Best stereo version: Past Masters (2009)
I think a good way to describe this version is this: Take the best mono mix and make it stereo. Good sound all around, and definitely the most exciting-sounding stereo version that's ever been officially released by EMI on CD.

Definitive CD version of "I Want To Hold Your Hand": The Compact Disc EP Collection
Mind you, since 1988 the stereo version has been drilled into me. It's what was on the CD (remember, the original Past Masters came out in 1988, not 1987, although it was mixed in 1987), and ergo it's also what's been played on the radio ever since. But the mono mix definitely has the edge. Remember, "I Want To Hold Your Hand" was the first song The Beatles ever recorded on a 4-track tape, so the folks at Abbey Road were just learning how to record with it. As a result, we don't have the best balance, so the true stereo mixes have to be pretty primitive.

The mono versions, though, wow. I think my first exposure to a true mono version of "I Want To Hold Your Hand" was when I got The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1, and I listened to the mono Meet The Beatles! in my car on my way home from work. Mind you, I was not quite 30 years old at the time, but I'd been familiar with "I Want To Hold Your Hand" all my life -- I heard it everywhere: the radio, music systems in stores, lip-sync competitions (I grew up in the '80s), you name it...and to be honest with you, I got sick of it long before I became a Beatles fan in 1987. But when I heard the mono Meet The Beatles! on CD, I turned the volume up. Just the excitement...forget the lyrics, it was the music that was making the statement -- and what a statement it was. I suddenly understood what it must have been like to be a Beatlemaniac in 1964, and it only took me 17 years of being a Beatles fan to do that.

---

This Boy

In England, "This Boy" was the B-side of The Beatles' worldwide breakthrough song "I Want To Hold Your Hand." It was a nice balance -- a rocker on the A-side, and a nice mellow ballad on the other. I'm not quite sure why "I Saw Her Standing There" was chosen for the B-side in the United States, nor am I sure how Capitol was able to release "I Saw Her Standing There," as Vee-Jay kinda-sorta had the rights to that song, maybe, in a way, depending on what day it was and whether Transglobal had a pending lawsuit against Vee-Jay. I know it's discussed in one of the Bruce Spizer books (or, at least, I THINK it is), but man, I'm on a roll talking about my Beatles listening experience; I can't stop to consult the Spizer books, even though they are among the best out there!

There's something special about "This Boy." When I first heard it, I thought for sure it had to have been a cover that was originally done by, maybe, the Platters or some other group from the '50s. It sounded too professional. Too polished. And generally, too good to have been written by these scruffy young Liverpudlians. But it was one of those songs that taught me this: if it sounds too good to have been a Beatles original, it is a Beatles original.

Also, it's a fairly easy song to learn if you and two friends want to sing in three-part harmony. It's a very simple harmony that sounds absolutely stunning. And I also wonder if I'm the only person who's noticed (long ago, not just when I've been doing this intense listening) that when George sings the line "would always feel the same" that he sings the word "feel" with melisma. Most people, when singing that part, will sing "would always feel" with the note pattern of "G G A B" and hold the B for the entire word "feel," but George actually sings it "fee-eel," so that the "fee" part is a B and the "eel" part is an A -- it sounds really cool.

Something else I've noticed for quite awhile is that there's an obvious edit between the end of the bridge and the beginning of the last verse. The timing of the edit is actually quite good, as the song doesn't skip a beat at all, but you can tell the edit is there because John's voice suddenly cuts out completely before the last verse starts. It's possible that the bridge could be an edit piece, but I'm typing this away from home so I don't have access to my Lewisohn book, so I can't say for sure.

Unfortunately, the song fades out, which is strange because according to Mark Lewisohn, "This Boy" was recorded with a complete ending (yeah, I know, I'm not near the book, but I remember reading about it!), probably similar to how The Beatles performed it live. Even the outtake that was released on the Free As A Bird EP fades. I'd love to hear a studio version with a complete ending.

The song for years was only available in mono; anything labeled "stereo" was just some kind of rechanneled attempt to fake a stereo mix. I believe the stereo mix that eventually did see the light of day was made in 1976, and it's an odd mix. The bass, drums, and acoustic guitar are panned hard-left, the vocals hard-right, and George's lead guitar centered. And what's really odd is that during the bridge, John's lead vocal is double-tracked (as on the mono version), but one of those lead vocals leaks over into the left stereo channel. Yup, just one of John's lead vocals -- not his other, and none of the background harmonies bleed over.

Mono Versions
SINGLE:
There's a really nice bass sound on this version. As I say with most mono versions of Beatles songs, it could use some more treble. The vocals sound slightly more reverbed than what I'm used to hearing on "This Boy," this time in a 50's doo-wop kind of way. What stuck out for me when listening to the single version is that I could actually hear the guitar pick strumming the acoustic guitar's chords. Niiiice! And listen to that awesome bass line right before John sings "Oh and this boy would be happy..." It's actually in every version, but I noticed it for the first time when listening to the single version. George's guitar sounds a little buried during the bridge.

CAPITOL (mono):
The EQ has more treble, but also a bit too much bass -- the bass actually gets distorted in a few places. This could be the result of a loss of tape generation, though. George's strumming also sounds a bit cleaner than on the single version. However, as with a lot of the Capitol releases, it sounds like there's a tape glitch, in this case during the second verse. And did I hear an edit during the bridge between "Oh and" and "this boy"?? Or was it a tape glitch?

CAPITOL (fake stereo):
As with prior Capitol fake-stereo mixes, the EQ actually sounds pretty bright. However, in this case, the bass is overwhelming and distorted most of the time. And it sounds like not only is this mix high/low fake stereo, but it's also duophonic with extra reverb added. And somehow, I noticed a LOT of tape glitches that I didn't hear in the true mono Capitol version. Basically, this version SUCKS. Period.

MM:
The 2009 mono release sounds like the single, but with slightly more treble. The vocals seem to be potted down a little bit. EQ is slightly better than on the single, but not as good as on the Capitol mono. Overall the sound is slightly cleaner than on prior versions.

Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1
Specifically, I'm referring to the "stereo" mix of Meet The Beatles!
Just no. That's all I have to say.

Best mono version: Mono Masters
This was a tough one. I prefer the EQ on the mono Capitol version, but I think I had to go with cleanliness, as the various elements on the recording on PM09 sound cleaner, while the Capitol version has tape glitches (not to mention a lower tape generation).

Stereo Versions
PM87:
Surprisingly, this old CD version has nice EQ all around, but the vocal channel on the right overpowers the instruments on the left. The stereo version has kind of a weird mix -- bass, drums, and acoustic guitar are on the left, lead guitar in the middle, vocals on the right.

EP:
The sound is slightly brighter than on PM87, especially with George's guitar.

PM09:
The sound and EQ are as good as on the EP version, but there's a much better balance of channels. Still the same separation, but the left channel does a much better job of complementing the right channel, so the vocals aren't too overpowering, even when listening through headphones. Interestingly, George's guitar seems to be quieter on this version than on other versions.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters, Vol. 1 (1987)
It's not so much that it's a bad version, just the least-good. The truth is that all the stereo versions sound very nice and are pretty clean.

Best stereo version: Past Masters (2009)
Good EQ, crisp sound throughout, and a good balance make this the best of the three stereo versions we've been given over the years.

Definitive CD version of "This Boy": Past Masters (2009)
Yes, the stereo mix has all the vocals panned to one side, which is generally frowned upon, but you know what? The newest stereo release of the song has the brightest sound and, to my ears, was the most pleasant listen of the seven versions that have been released on CD.

The Beatles' Definitive CD Versions: the Long Tall Sally E.P.

[My apologies to anybody following this blog for its Chicago theme...but as you know by now, I hardly ever touch this blog, so I'm going to use it as sort of a secondary blog for other things. I'll still post some Chicago stuff here from time to time.]

In England, The Beatles released E.P.s ("extended play") These 7-inch records were very similar to singles, except there were two songs per side. Generally, the E.P.s The Beatles released were truncated versions of their current albums. This was to satisfy young fans who wanted more than just two songs, but didn't have enough money to buy the entire albums. There were I think two Beatles E.P.s put out by Capitol (Four By The Beatles and 4 By The Beatles -- different E.P.s, but almost exact same title!), but E.P.s never really took off in the States.

With Long Tall Sally, the group broke the "truncated album" habit: the E.P. contained four entirely new songs that you couldn't get anywhere else. There were a cover of Little Richard's "Long Tall Sally" and Lennon's own "I Call Your Name" (which could theoretically be considered a cover, as it was originally put out by Billy J. Kramer and the Dakotas) on one side, and Larry Williams' "Slow Down" and Carl Perkins' "Matchbox" on the other side.

Capitol Records included Side 1 of this E.P. on the album The Beatles' Second Album, and Side 2 on Something New in an attempt to create more Beatles albums than The Beatles actually recorded. As was the practice on the early albums Capitol released, extra reverb was added to the stereo mixes, as Capitol's guy in charge of foreign product, Dave Dexter, decided that the reverb was necessary for the music to be accessible to the American market. (Although credited on the albums, Dexter himself didn't actually do the American mixes, according to Bruce Spizer.) One on hand, it may be sacrilege to tamper with George Martin's productions, but on the other hand, it's hard to argue with someone who's a native of the country that gave the world rock'n'roll in the first place. Rock'n'roll that The Beatles wanted to perform, mind you.

Anyway, here are my notes about the songs on the Long Tall Sally E.P. as released on CD. There have been so far six legally-released CD versions, all of which I auditioned for this project:

• Past Masters, Vol. 1 was the first CD to contain these songs, released in 1988 (compiled in 1987). It was a compilation of all the tracks that did not appear on any of The Beatles' canonical album catalog. Therefore, Past Masters was primarily a singles collection. The CDs were released as separate volumes, while the vinyl and cassette versions were released as a two-record/two-tape set.


• The Compact Disc E.P. Collection -- In 1992, a box set of all The Beatles' U.K. E.P.'s was released on 3-inch CDs. As with The Beatles In Mono (2009), the E.P. CDs were exact repros of the original records, with front and back artwork. A bonus compilation E.P. was also included in the box. Many people feel that the mastering in this box was an improvement over the 1987 CDs.


• The Capitol Albums, Volume 1 -- in 2004, eight of The Beatles' Capitol albums were released across two box sets, four CDs each. Each CD contained a complete album in both mono and stereo. Some fans always argued that this release wasn't really necessary. The philosophy was, "Why not just rip the songs from the existing CDs and re-burn them in the Capitol order?" Well, hard-core fans know that not only did the track orders differ, but many of the mixes were also different.


• Mono Masters -- In short, the all-mono version of Past Masters that was included in the 2009 box The Beatles In Mono.


• Past Masters -- notice there's no volume number now, because the 2009 version is only available as a two-CD set. The track listing on the 2009 version is exactly the same as on the 1987 version.

Now, without further ado, here are my song-by-song, version-by-version notes:

---

Long Tall Sally

Mono Versions
Compact Disc E.P. Collection
Very in-your-face vocal at first, then a little less in-your-face when the instruments kick in. Great bass line. Extra reverb on Paul's voice that I never heard before. Excellent listening experience.

The Beatles' Second Album (The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1)
Interestingly, less reverb on Paul's voice; ironic, considering how Dave Dexter usually had extra reverb added onto Beatles recordings on Capitol to make them more suitable for the American market. Unlike with The Compact Disc E.P. Collection, Paul's voice is mixed far forward throughout. Good mix, but not as exciting as on the E.P. box.

Mono Masters
Definitely the cleanest sounding of all three. More reverb on Paul's voice, and Paul's voice is further forward than on the EP box set. Bass line, surprisingly, doesn't sound as driving as on the EP box. Unfortunately, Ringo's amazing drumming in the end isn't very pronounced.

Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. I hate to call it "worst" because it's still good. But it doesn't have the oomph of the E.P. box version or the cleanliness of the 2009 version.

Best mono version: Compact Disc E.P. Collection. Probably the most enjoyable of the three. None is actually bad at all.

Stereo Versions
Past Masters, Vol. 1 (1987)
Piano is very pronounced -- in fact, it's very overpowering, especially when listening with headphones. George's lead guitar is more audible throughout than on mono.

The Beatles' Second Album (The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1)
The mix itself sounds the same as on Past Masters Vol. 1. However, interestingly enough, it doesn't sound as good. There's heavy reverb added that actually does make it sound a bit more exciting, but upon close listen it's obvious that Past Masters used a higher-generation tape, which is understandable because the Capitol albums all used lower generation masters.

Past Masters (2009)
This actually doesn't sound very different from the 1987 mix. It sounds slightly brighter and slightly cleaner. However, the piano isn't as overpowering as on the 1987 version.

Worst stereo version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. I'm wondering if the reason, in 2004, when I heard the Capitol box set, if my mind didn't tell me that it sounds better than the 1987 CDs simply because I was very prejudiced against the sound of the 1987 CDs. Hate to say it, but the 2004 release actually sounds even worse than the 1987 one. The added reverb would have been great if it weren't for the loss of tape generation.

Best stereo version: Past Masters (2009). Thing is, though, upon close inspection, the stereo versions aren't all that great. But the newest release is the best.

Definitive CD version of "Long Tall Sally": Compact Disc E.P. Collection. First of all, mono wins out because the mono mix really emphasizes the kick-ass drumming at the end; the stereo mixes seem to bury the drumming. The not-to-be-missed driving bass line emphasized by the E.P. box mix put this version over the top.

---

I Call Your Name

Mono Versions
Compact Disc E.P. Collection
Amazing emphasis on a great bass line. Performance-wise, the intro is sloppy: George slips over his Rickenbacker 12-string, while some of John's double-tracked vocal comes in late. Tape problems evident at the end of the first verse and the ska break. Really interesting bass work right before end of fade-out that I never noticed before.

The Beatles' Second Album (The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1)
Volume is noticeably louder than on E.P. box set. Also, playback sounds slightly slow. Overall, pretty good sound. Sounds like there's an edit before the first "Oh, I can't sleep at night" that wasn't noticeable on the E.P. version. Tape glitches in E.P. version aren't noticeable here. Wild bass work in fade-out still present.

Mono Masters
As with "Long Tall Sally," this is a cleaner-sounding version of the song. The EQ sounds ever-so-slightly brighter. Cowbell is almost inaudible, though, and the bass line isn't as pronounced. Sonds like an edit on first "I never weep at night" -- an edit I couldn't hear on the other mono versions. Fade-out sounds louder than on the other versions.

Worst mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. The quality itself is almost identical to that of the E.P. box, but the playback is a bit slower than usual, making it sound a bit plodding.

Best mono version: Compact Disc E.P. Collection. While the 2009 version is definitely the cleanest, it just seems that the E.P. version has a lot more punch and really grabs the listener. Again, points for emphasizing the bass line.

Stereo Versions
Past Masters, Vol. 1 (1987)
The Rickenbacker intro is spot-on this time. It's obvious from listening that the intro is an edit piece, as there's an audible edit right after John's single-tracked "I call your name" at the beginning. (John's voice is single-tracked until the phrase "but you're not there.") With this version, you can hear the sensitivity of the microphone -- John's P's and F's are overemphasized, and the S's are very sibilant. Actually, it's almost distracting. An edit is also heard shortly before the guitar solo. Bass is barely audible. Fades out earlier than mono version.

The Beatles' Second Album (The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1)
At first, sounds just like the Past Masters Vol. 1 version but with a lot of additional reverb. However, this presents yet another version of the intro: the Rickenbacker is flawless, but the double-tracking is off: part of the line "I call your name" is single-tracked, part is double-tracked. The bass is a bit more pronounced than the 1987 version. Although the tape sounds noticeably at least a generation later than the version used on Past Masters Vol. 1 and it plays back ever-so-slightly slower, this version does sound a bit punchier with more excitement.

Past Masters (2009)
The impression I get, comparing this version to the other two stereo versions, is that this version sounds less...threatening, I guess. As with the prior two 2009 versions, this mix sounds the cleanest. The harshness of some of John's consonants, while still there, is a bit less emphasized. There's a noticeable edit during the last few bars of the guitar solo. Overall, this version has the best EQ.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters, Vol. 1 (1987). The bass is mixed too far down to really enjoy the groove on this version; plus, you can hear John popping his P's a bit too much.

Best stereo version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. I'm sure my opinion here will anger the purists. How dare I choose the "Dexterized," second-generation version over the purer, first-generation version! Yes, the actual audio quality of the 2009 remaster is noticeably better, but believe it or not, Dexter's remixing goons actually did make this track more exciting.

Definitive CD version of "I Call Your Name": stereo mix on The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. Wow, I'm really putting my life in jeopardy, picking the manipulated version! But my ears, attitude, and just personal taste make me pick this version. One thing you gotta admit: on the earlier tunes the Beatles did, the bass line really is the driving force, and this version really brings out the bass line. What? The mono versions do, too? Well, truth be told, while "I Call Your Name" really is an excellent song (and in my opinion very underrated), the mono versions (and in fact, most versions) are performance and production nightmares, what with George's sloppy 12-stringing in the intro, the noticeable edits, and the double-tracking inconsistencies. The stereo versions have slightly better performances, and Capitol's reverb-laden version has perhaps the most driving groove of the six CD versions.

---

Slow Down

Mono Versions
Compact Disc E.P. Collection
This mix sounds weird. The piano seems to have weird EQ on it, as do the rest of the instruments, come to think of it. It almost sounds like this mono mix was made by folding down a stereo mix, or worse, OOPSing a stereo mix. Or perhaps as if this were mastered through an air conditioner. Sounds like a tape error during the line "but now you got a boyfriend down the street." Was that an edit I heard immediately after the instrumental break and before the last verse?

Something New (The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1)
Mix sounds slightly better than on the E.P. box, yet a lot more tape flaws are evident; perhaps the E.P. version was mastered in an attempt to mask a lot of the tape glitches? But still, this version sounds noticeably punchier. Guitar solo sounds more in-your-face than on the E.P. version.

Mono Masters
Sounds a lot like the Something New version. Unfortunately, while the piano is difficult to hear on all three mono versions, on this version, it's almost completely inaudible. The guitar solo, though, sounds even more in-your-face than on Something New -- in fact, I noticed a very, very minor slip-up in the guitar solo here that I didn't notice in the other two versions. However, the tape glitches either are not present or are not as noticeable on this version.

Worst mono version: The Compact Disc E.P. Collection. Really, the mix doesn't sound enjoyable at all. There's just something not right about it.

Best mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. It was tough to decide between this and Mono Masters. To be honest with you, none of the mono versions sound particularly exciting to me. Yeah, the 2009 remaster doesn't seem to have the tape glitches that the Capitol version has, but the 2009 version is almost missing entirely an essential element of the song: the rousing piano overdub. My decision here wasn't so much which mono version was the best, but which one was the least bad.

Stereo Versions
Past Masters, Vol. 1 (1987)
Right away, the first note grabbed my attention. The piano might actually be mixed a little too loudly, though. The mix is odd -- most of the rhythm instruments are on the left, the piano is on the right, and the lead guitar is centered. John's vocal is mixed a bit too far forward. It's amazing how good the quality of the equipment was, though, as you can hear everything going on in John's mouth -- the sounds of the consonants, the movement of saliva...pretty darn sensitive for equipment that's from no later than 1964! Sure wish I could hear the bass, though.

Something New (The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1)
The mix is, technically, the same as what's on the 1987 Past Masters CD. It does seem that the left channel is a bit louder, so this way the piano doesn't overpower the song. Definitely a better balance. Of course, there's some extra reverb on this track, courtesy of Dave Dexter's engineers, but not as noticeable as on the prior two songs. There seem to be a few tape glitches in the beginning, and a performance error either not present or not as pronounced on the 1987 CD happens during the first verse. Overall, a very enjoyable version. Bass could still be a bit louder, though. Seems to be a little bit of phasing in the left channel at the beginning of the second verse.

Past Masters (2009)
Sounds a lot like the mix on The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1, complete with the tape flaws in the beginning. The left-right balance is better than on the 1987 CD, but not as good as on The Capitol Albums. The mastering sounds pretty clean. Noticed the phasing in the second verse again, but not as prominent as on The Capitol Albums. Also noticed for the first time that there seems to be phasing during the second chorus as well.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters, Vol. 1. Too much piano and guitar solo, not enough everything else. The overall sound is just plain lifeless.

Best stereo version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. Another track noticeably "Dexterized," but somehow the Dexterization actually made the sound a little bit brighter than the other two versions. The EQ is slightly better as well.

Definitive CD version of "Slow Down": stereo mix on The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. To be honest, none of the six versions sound particularly exciting, which is a shame considering how "Slow Down" is one of the finest covers in the Beatles' catalog. The bass is really lacking, but the American stereo version does the best it can with it. The mono versions really lack punch.

---

Matchbox

Mono Versions
Compact Disc E.P. Collection
Good mix, but lacking treble. Great emphasis on the bass, makes the track pretty exciting. Piano is barely audible. The treble improves for a brief moment at the beginning of the guitar solo, then goes back out, and there appears to be some accidental phasing at the end of the guitar solo. Sounds like George hit a string or two he wasn't supposed to at one point during the solo. Severe vocal double-tracking error on the line "watch how your puppy dog runs." Sounds like some vocal improv during the guitar solo off-mic.

Something New (The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1)
Sounds just a teeny-weeny bit brighter than on the E.P. box. EQ is slightly better overall, especially on Ringo's voice. Still can hear vocal improv during guitar solo, but not as noticeable. Wow...still with the "puppy dog error." Piano is slightly more noticeable. Didn't notice any accidental phasing.

Mono Masters
As with the E.P. box version, I'm wishing there were a bit more treble. Ringo's vocal sounds mixed a bit more forward than on the prior CD versions. Not as much reverb on Ringo's vocal. Same phasing and guitar error as on 1987 version, same vocal improv, just as noticeable as on the 1987 CD. Seriously, that "puppy dog" error makes me cringe!

Worst mono version: Compact Disc E.P. Collection. EQ leaves a lot to be desired, and the phasing might be distracting to some listeners, especially with headphones on.

Best mono version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. Still not a great mix, but the EQ is slightly better, and the phasing errors seem to be gone.

Stereo Versions
Past Masters, Vol. 1 (1987)
The EQ is so much better than on the mono mixes. As with "Slow Down," the rhythm instruments are in the left channel, and the piano is in the right. This time, though, the piano isn't as overpowering. Sounds like one of Ringo's double-tracked vocals is much louder than the other -- this is undoubtedly the strategy George Martin and company used to mask the "puppy dog" error, which is present on the stereo mix, but you really have to know what you're listening for. Noticeable drop-out during the guitar solo -- I'm guessing they potted Ringo's mic down during the guitar solo, and that Ringo's headphones were leaking into the mic, making the sound a lot more fuller, actually, during his vocals. Overall, enjoyable version.

The Beatles' Second Album (The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1)
Surprisingly good EQ. There's a bit of hiss and a very subtle tape flaw in the beginning. Sounds like Ringo's popping his P's here, but it's not noticeable on the 1987 version.

Past Masters (2009)
Definitely a noticeable improvement over the original 1987 Past Masters Vol. 1 version. The sound is much cleaner. EQ could be a bit better, but overall, not bad. The "puppy dog" error is almost completely inaudible on this version.

Worst stereo version: Past Masters Vol. 1 (1987). Truth be told, none of the stereo versions actually sound bad, but this is the least-good sounding of all three. Still an enjoyable listen.

Best stereo version: The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. To be honest, this was a tough call. The 2009 remaster sounds great, but the EQ on the Capitol version sounds a little bit brighter, pushing it over the edge.

Definitive CD version of "Matchbox": stereo version on The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1. Stereo wins out over mono, period, for several reasons, The mix is brighter in stereo. The mono mixes have some tape phasing that was obviously a technical error. Parts of George's guitar solo sound flawed in mono, but fixed in stereo. Finally, the atrocious double-tracking "puppy dog" error in mono is fixed in stereo. Yep, the mono version has a lot of errors -- yet George Martin and the Beatles themselves want us to believe the mono versions are definitive? The errors are definitive?? Admittedly, listening for the mistakes is a favorite part of listening to Beatles songs for hard-core fans, including myself. But as a whole, the stereo version wins out. Believe it or not, the Capitol version has overall the best sound, with the 2009 stereo remaster coming in a close second.

The Gallery of Altered Red Eye Boxes

last updated: April 12, 2009

Wow. It's been over a year since my last post here. I figured now would be a good time to introduce "The Gallery of Altered Red Eye boxes.

For those of you unfamiliar with Chicago's local culture, the Red Eye is a free daily paper made by the Chicago Tribune, and there are boxes all over the city where you can grab 'em; there's also a Saturday edition that's subscription-only, providing you can grab your copy before someone swipes it. The Red Eye is considered a pretty hip paper to read during your morning commute.

But anyway, on both sides of a Red Eye box you will see the word "FREE" spelled out in individual stick-on letters. Now, in a city of nearly three million people, you're bound to have some wiseasses among the population, and those wiseasses realize that stick-on letters plus wacky sense of humor equals fun. I like to take pictures of these alterations, especially because many of them can disappear at any given moment.

Please let it be known that I merely photographed these altered Red Eye boxes; I personally have never altered any. Just too much effort for a guy who has a life. Having said that, let's get on with the Gallery:

"PEE" is a common alteration. It's simple: you just remove the "F" and chop off a leg of the "R." The alteration pictured here is outside the Walgreens where Broadway, Ridge, and Bryn Mawr meet. The best "PEE" I've seen so far was on a box by the Blue Line station at UIC. It was beautiful. It read, "PEE???" Sadly, that alteration was gone the next time I walked by with my camera.

Here is a slightly more thoughtful variation of "PEE," reading "I PEE." I don't remember exactly where this box was located, but I think it was on Broadway in or near the Edgewater neighborhood. Or it might have been on Lincoln Avenue in Lincoln Square. Don't remember for sure.

Another one whose location I don't recall, but I think it was somewhere in Lincoln Park, most likely near Fullerton. Any ideas who "JAK" is?

This is an example of what I call a "botched alteration." I don't know what happened here. Perhaps the glue wore off on the letters. Maybe the alterer was spotted and subsequently ran away. Or maybe whoever did this just found it too hard to be worth the effort and gave up.

This is probably what the previous botcher was trying to accomplish: "REEFER." This is a tough job: you need BOTH of the "FREE" stickers on the box to do it. Thankfully, I had my digital camera handy that day! I believe this one was on Armitage somewhere between Clark and Halsted.

Hard on the CTA?

huh huh....I said "hard on"...huh huh....that was cool! huh huh....

*ahem* sorry...anyway...

I guess I've stirred up a mini-controversy recently. A week or so ago, there was a mention in Kyra Kyles' "Going Public" column in the RedEye about bus drivers taking unauthorized breaks with passengers in the car. The article was basically a Q&A with a CTA rep, and said rep said that drivers do have scheduled breaks but not during a route.

Well, to make a long story short, I posted this video on YouTube (details are on YouTube), and e-mailed Kyra and gave her a heads-up about it. She included my brief e-mail to her in this past Wednesday's column. Suddenly hundreds of people watched the video. I got many positive and neutral comments and a few negative ones that make me think that I might have caused a mini-controversy. One commenter mentioned "15 minutes of fame." Naaah, that's not what I was after -- hell, I was a radio broadcaster for about five years, so I already had my 15 minutes!

Anyway, I'd like to take this opportunity to both defend my own negativity and cite further examples -- and also to laud the Chicago Transit Authority, as believe it or not, they actually do things right sometimes!

Bad Experiences
Like many Chicago residents, I've had my share of aggravation from the CTA. Yes, I've been blasted before and I'll probably be blasted again for (God forbid!) saying not nice things about the CTA, but I give them 75 dollars a month to provide a service as promised, and that's what I expect. Hell, people pay less a month for cable and if one thing not right happens, they threaten lawsuits, have hissy fits, you name it; I just raise my concerns.

You can start with threats. Quit threatening to reduce service, especially on the South Side where they already have squat in terms of mass transit options. Quit threatening your people's jobs. Quit threatening to make people pay more for less service. Yeah, I know, doomsday was averted, but I won't be surprised to see the bitching and moaning later on. Don't even tell me that with all the people jamming your buses and trains that you don't have enough money.

Bus Drivers
Don't even tell me that bus drivers are perfect -- especially the one who ran over that lady who was removing her bike from the rack. Here are a few things I've seen first-hand:

• Unauthorized breaks. I wasn't on the bus at this time, but I was walking down Lincoln Avenue, and I actually saw a #11 bus, with a lot of passengers, pull over at the McDonald's at the intersection of Lincoln and Fullerton. The driver got out, so I decided to just hang around out of curiosity and see what happened. The driver actually went into the McDonald's, and minutes later came out with a bag of food (if you want to call it that), ran back into the bus with it, and drove away. Add to that my personal experience from February 16. I wouldn't have minded (or is it "mound"?) if the driver would have announced that he had to run in the store because he was dying of thirst or something, or even lied and said, "My dispatcher is asking me to go in and make a call" or something, but the thing is, people have things to do and places to go. I certainly did.
• Chatty drivers. On the same day that I videographed the driver on his unauthorized break, I was on the #22 bus when, at one stop, the driver recognized a friend of hers and the friend's young daughter and decided to just sit there and chat. Minutes went by. As they were chatting I saw the Montrose bus pass by. That was the bus I was supposed to transfer to at the next stop, but it was too late. (I figured I'd just get off at the stop and start walking and just grab the next Montrose bus to go by. I ended up walking the entire rest of my trip. Not that I don't need exercise, mind you!) I was about to speak up when she closed the door and the bus pulled away. The chattiness is also common during the morning rush on the #84 bus, when the driver takes a few moments to chat with the newspaper vendor.
• Where's the bus? Bus schedules are merely suggested times. Especially at night, when you'll wait 90 minutes for a Clark bus that's supposed to come by every 30 minutes.

L
You'll notice that I have actually not too many complaints about the buses. The trains are my main peeve.

• The Red Line schedules are not year-round. When the cold weather hits, somehow the rush hour is no longer very rushed at all. Before my office moved downtown, I worked in Lakeview and had a 20-minute train commute. That included switching from the Red Line to the Brown Line and a roughly five-minute wait on a bad day. Well, on one particularly cold day (seven degrees), I got on the Red Line platform at 8:30. My train commute was the usual 20 minutes. I got to work at 9:35. Red Line trains are scheduled to come by every five (or fewer) minutes during the morning and evening rushes. You do the math. Just last week when I was waiting for a train, I heard an announcement saying the next train was going to be express to Sheridan. Then when my train arrived, they announced it was going to be express to Addison. (Why are there express trains? Right -- to catch up because of train delays!) I loved going express to Addison, as it made my trip pretty zippy, but boy, did I not want to be among the masses I saw standing at Lawrence, Wilson, Argyle, and Berwyn!
• Unexplained slowdowns. Explain to me why at 8:00 in the morning the Red Line passes between Sheridan and Addison at about 20 miles an hour, but at 4:00 in the afternoon it's about three times faster. There have been times when I'd leave my Red Line stop on the North Side at 7:30am and still be late for my 9:00am shift downtown a block and a half away from the Red Line stop.
  
• Balance the damn volume of the announcements! In one car the announcements can be so loud that your eardrum blows out, while in the next one they're so quiet that they might actually be silent and you might be hearing sound leakage from the next car.
• Emergency doors. Hey, CTA -- panhandling isn't an emergency! How about putting alarms on the damn doors so that if someone goes through the door, it's assumed that it's an emergency, and an alarm sounds? I'll betcha that'll cut down on panhandlers.
• Odors. The Blue Line and, at night, the Red Line is full of 'em. Hey, CTA -- Febreze is pretty cheap and it'll last for several trains. USE IT! There's no reason I should get in an empty train at Howard and smell death (and see Chee-tos all over the floor).
• More train lines! Just to give you an idea...Someone living in Edgewater and who needs to go to O'Hare via mass transit has to take a 92 bus to Jefferson Park and wait a while for a Blue Line train...either that or take the Red Line all the way downtown and transfer to a train on the slow-zone-infested Blue Line. Just to go due west. How about a train line that goes to Hyde Park? Or a Pink Line stop close to United Center? In New York City, for comparison's sake, you can't swing a dead cat without hitting a subway station -- and their trains are FAST (you can go from lower Manhattan to 71st Street in under ten minutes -- I've done it) and soundproof. Yeah, you can take a bus, but what about rapid transit?
• Yellow Line. Who the hell wants to go to Skokie? Especially if the train doesn't stop at Old Orchard! I guess it's useful if you want to get out of Skokie, though. And what's with that ridiculous waste-of-paper-and-ink station map in the Yellow Line?
  

Okay, enough bitching, now for the....

Good Things About CTA

Does the New York subway system have advantages over Chicago's L system? Yup. The MTA subway (and elevated lines) are all over the city, everywhere you go. However, CTA has only a small handful of train lines, and they're limited in their scope. You can go to an MTA subway station and pay for your fare with a credit/debit card; can't do that at a CTA station. MTA trains are pretty soundproof -- you can actually hold a conversation with someone, but forget it if you're going through the State Street, Dearborn, or Logan Square subway and you want to have a conversation or perhaps listen to your iPod. New York subway trains are lightning-fast, too, while CTA blames its slow trains on deteriorating rails that are much younger than those of MTA.

Having said that, CTA has some significant advantages. The trains and stations are cleaner -- even on the Red and Blue Lines! The CTA announcements are much clearer, as opposed to the muffles in the MTA subway. When the doors on a New York subway train are about to close, you hear two unpleasant off-key blips and a creepy clownlike voice telling you, "Staaaaand clear of the closing doooors!" On CTA trains, you hear two notes of a (possibly synthesized) bell carillon, followed by a voice very candidly saying, "Doors closing." Rides can be cheaper -- in New York, the fare is two bucks across the board; no fast cards, no nothin' (except perhaps for student, senior, and handicapped discounts). CTA has $1.75 fares via Chicago Card, $75 unlimited monthly passes, $5 all-day passes (MTA has this, too, but when they first rolled it out it was a complete disaster), weekly passes, etc. And dammit, when Chicago has the Crosstown Classic, it truly is a subway series -- you can take the Red Line from one ballpark to the other (and going through the entire State Street Subway), while New York's excuse for a "subway series" isn't quite so direct; it involves some complex transfers. And you can see some pretty interesting things in CTA's elevated trains. I'm sure you can on the MTA's elevated trains in the outer boroughs, but through Manhattan, you just see....darkness. Yuk! And rats.

CTA has -- or used to have -- the "blessed train" on the Red Line. That was nice -- getting in the train on the way to work and hearing a pleasant voice telling you that you're "on the best train 'cause it's the blessed train," telling students to study hard so they can be successful, etc.

Ride the #147 bus and see Lake Shore Drive how you can't see it if you're driving. And a lot of times it's much quicker than the Red Line.

Dig the view of the skyline as you're riding between Armitage and Sedgwick on the Brown or Purple Line, and tell me that's not worth the fare.

CTA Holiday Train. 'Nuff said.

In fairness, with the exception of Hyde Park, everything worth going to in Chicago is easily accessible via CTA vehicles.

I think I shall end this post abruptly.

Suburban shootings

You've all heard about the shootings at Northern Illinois University. What might not have caught the attention of those outside the Chicago metro area is a similar incident at a Lane Bryant store in Tinley Park, in which a gunman opened fire on six people, killing five of them.

What irks me is a letter that appeared in the RedEye, the free daily paper that the Chicago Tribune puts out. The letter was from either Dana Hardin or Donna Hardin of Chicago, and this person, in a nutshell, says that there was a racial dividing line in terms of the reactions to each shooting. Because the gunman at Lane Bryant was black, everybody wants his head on a platter; but because the gunman at NIU was white, people immediately jumped to the conclusion that he went on the shooting spree because he was off his meds.

Give.
Me.
A.
Break.

Do we all want the Lane Bryant gunman's head? Hell, yeah. Why? Because he's a threat to society. There were six victims, and there's a chance there can be more in the future from the same guy.

What about the NIU guy, though? One thing Ms. (or, if it's Dana and not Donna, then possibly Mr.) Hardin seems to forget is that the NIU gunman offed himself, so of course we're not calling for his head! Would we be if he didn't? You'd better believe it.

D[a/on]na Hardin also writes that mental illness is just an excuse, and even goes so far as to explicitly include post-partum depression. Wow. You're not going to win any female friends like that.

Were people sticking up for the NIU gunman? Well, in a way, yes. He did have a serious mental problem that he was being treated for. He went off his meds and went nuts. And people who knew him were in shock. He was never expected to be the kind of person who would go on a violent rampage on a college campus. Not his friends, not his former professors...no one.

So why does the (white) NIU gunman seemingly get a lot of sympathy while the (black) Lane Bryant gunman has a price tag on his head? Again, because he's still out there and a threat to the community, and answer me this, Ms. Hardin: who is the Lane Bryant gunman? What's his name? What's his background? Does he have any diagnosed mental afflictions? Is he a former Lane Bryant employee who went on the loose wig just as the NIU gunman was a former NIU student who completely lost it?

What's that?? You don't know?? Oh, that's right, you don't! Nobody knows who the Lane Bryant gunman was, ergo we know nothing about the guy (other than that he's a black male). Gee, kinda like how the TSA agent at the airport doesn't know me yet goes through the precaution of screening me and making me take off my shoes just to make sure I'm not going to try to blow the plane up.

Just deal with it, okay? We don't care what color the guy is. The fact is, he could be dangerous.

The Chicago Machine is still alive!

I went in person to register to vote at 69 West Washington before the original deadline. The lady at the office looked at my application, which I had downloaded and filled out ahead of time, and asked for my driver's license. She took my license, copied down the number, made a photocopy, and told me to check for my voter card in the mail. I was in and out in a matter of seconds. Wow! There must be a catch!

Heh...indeed, there was.

This past Friday, I received an envelope in the mail from the board of elections. Was it my voter card? Noooooooooooooo. It was a letter informing me that my registration did not go through because my application was missing some information, specifically my driver's license number.

Okay, now go back and read that first paragraph again.

What's wrong with this picture? One of my coworkers suggested that perhaps I voted against Daley at some point in my life. Well, that's not true, because I never voted in Chicago...partly because the city wouldn't LET me vote.

Oh...and what's more...the letter, which I received on Friday, January 18. And I work full-time, which means I didn't get the letter until after all the offices had closed. And the letter informed me that I had until January 22 to register.

Guess what I spent my lunch break doing.

I love Chicago, but if the entire government went up in flames, I'd be a very happy man.

CTA isn't all that bad.

Well, it's that time of month again: time for the Chicago Transit Authority to threaten to cut service, fire people, and increase fares. Yeah, we've heard this all before on more than one occasion, and it gets old. And yes, as recently as, oh...today...I had a train door shut in my face when I was trying to board the Brown Line. But you know what? The CTA does have a good side. The following pictures from the past holiday season are proof. (The timestamps are an hour off -- my camera didn't subtract an hour when we went back to standard time.)

On December 20, 2007, the CTA Holiday Train was doing the Red Line route northbound at about 6:30pm from where I work. I happen to get off work at 6:00, so I stayed late for a few minutes to ride the Holiday Train. It's really a nice thing. Here it is arriving at the Harrison stop:


Here's a bit of what the inside looked like:


Another angle of the inside of the car...


Windows are frosted with winter designs...


The usual ads you see near the ceiling were replaced by fake ads, including this one for "Northstar Bucks Coffee."


More fake advertisements...


The Holiday Train is completely decked out in Christmas. Christmas lights everywhere, Christmas music piped in over the PA...even the seats had Christmas-themed upholstery.


Due to switching or signaling problems, we were delayed at Belmont, so Santa stepped off his car to pose for pictures with customers.


Really, if this isn't enough reason to give CTA a pat on the back, then I don't know what is.

The O'Hare Guy Revisited

You may remember my prior post about the "O'Hare guy," who recorded those announcements played over the PA at the airport. You know, with the unmistakably thick Chicago accent. I have no idea who this guy is, but...well...he RULES!

Since we last paeaned the O'Hare Guy, he had three known recorded announcements. Since then, he has had at least one new one, but his "It is illegal for transportation companies to solicit rides..." warning was taken over by a woman's voice; you're lucky this blog exists so we can keep the O'Hare Guy's original announcement immortal.

His new announcement (well, sorta new -- I heard it several months ago but didn't manage to record it until now) warns customers of limitations the TSA is enforcing about what you can bring aboard the plane. Sorry about the noise -- they put up a !@#$ing Starbucks (as if we needed more of those damn places) right by the gate where I was waiting for my flight, and someone decided to turn on the espresso machine during the announcement.

Here's the (latest) complete O'Hare Guy Collection:

• "For those customers connecting to a flight on the C concourse in Terminal 1..."
  
• "In order to expedite the security checkpoint process..."
• "It is illegal for transportation companies to solicit rides at the airport..."
• "The TSA has limited..."

Happy holidays, O'Hare Guy...whoever and wherever you are!