Why remaster a perfect album
-
Been playing MCCartney a lot lately both original and the remaster and the original is so pure it is perfect
-
Because $$$$$$$$
-
That and it's a mile/kilometre off being the perfect album. His weakest album, in my view.
-
Another reason for remasters is to draw attention to the albums all over again, right? For them to reclaim a spotlight in the sun for a moment. And making more money off them goes hand in hand with that, a truly important consideration from the business aspect, but wanting more critical consideration and praise almost as much. Or just as much, or more. Wanting more listeners.
-
I tend to have more of a problem with bonus tracks. Those tend to sully good albums much more than mere remasters. I prefer remasters because they tend to feature bonus songs on a separate disc.
-
SusyLuvsPaul:
Another reason for remasters is to draw attention to the albums all over again, right? For them to reclaim a spotlight in the sun for a moment. And making more money off them goes hand in hand with that, a truly important consideration from the business aspect, but wanting more critical consideration and praise almost as much. Or just as much, or more. Wanting more listeners.
Well said, and there is more to remastering than just a cleaner sound, but it's that too. Remastering also preserves the recordings in digital form for the future. So they can reissue the album again in 2113 and 2213.
-
toris:
That and it's a mile/kilometre off being the perfect album. His weakest album, in my view.
It may not be perfect or his best, but it is a Classic. And it was the first time anybody ever made an album at home by themselves, at least to my knowledge. That alone makes McCartney (and Mc II) quite an achievement!
-
Wasn't aware of that fact, but you're probably right.
-
Yet another "first" for a Beatle
Or oops a "solo Beatle"--ouch--you know what I mean 
-
beatlesfanrandy:
toris:
That and it's a mile/kilometre off being the perfect album. His weakest album, in my view.
It may not be perfect or his best, but it is a Classic. And it was the first time anybody ever made an album at home by themselves, at least to my knowledge. That alone makes McCartney (and Mc II) quite an achievement!
True... but... without trying to be too critical.... if I was a first-Gen Beatle fan, grieving over the breakup and then dusting myself off and rediscovering my enthusiasm as new solo offerings were on the cusp.... I'd have been underwhelmed with McCartney.... I do like McCartney 2, though.... also has some underwhelming tracks, but has some great tracks too.
-
I've always found the "McCartney" album to be much stronger than "McCartney II". I like a lot more tracks on "McCartney", like "Junk," "Man We Was Lonely," "Maybe I'm Amazed," "That Would Be Something," "Every Night" and "Teddy Boy".
-
Sgt._Pepper:
I've always found the "McCartney" album to be much stronger than "McCartney II". I like a lot more tracks on "McCartney", like "Junk," "Man We Was Lonely," "Maybe I'm Amazed," "That Would Be Something," "Every Night" and "Teddy Boy".
Exactly agree with those songs! But I prefer Singalong Junk to 92.4% of the remnants.... I must admit I wasn't the biggest fan of McCartney 2 at first glance, but remove the instrumentals, let time whistle by, and I very, very much like it.... I used to hate the electronic bit on Temporary Secretary, but I now love that song..... McCartney 2 the better of the albums, for me... But neither a masterpiece.... Maybe I'm Amazed was out of place in the experimentation. .
-
toris:
beatlesfanrandy:
toris:
That and it's a mile/kilometre off being the perfect album. His weakest album, in my view.
It may not be perfect or his best, but it is a Classic. And it was the first time anybody ever made an album at home by themselves, at least to my knowledge. That alone makes McCartney (and Mc II) quite an achievement!
True... but... without trying to be too critical.... if I was a first-Gen Beatle fan, grieving over the breakup and then dusting myself off and rediscovering my enthusiasm as new solo offerings were on the cusp.... I'd have been underwhelmed with McCartney.... I do like McCartney 2, though.... also has some underwhelming tracks, but has some great tracks too.
Well, speaking as a first-gen Beatle fan, when McCartney came out we weren't really sure yet if they were breaking up. I loved McCartney (the album and the man!) especially Maybe I'm Amazed. We were definitely not "underwhelmed." Now when Macca II came out, I was underwhelmed. The only tracks I liked then were Coming Up and Waterfalls. I have since come to like (in a way) Temporary Secretary.
-
Nancy R:
toris:
beatlesfanrandy:
toris:
That and it's a mile/kilometre off being the perfect album. His weakest album, in my view.
It may not be perfect or his best, but it is a Classic. And it was the first time anybody ever made an album at home by themselves, at least to my knowledge. That alone makes McCartney (and Mc II) quite an achievement!
True... but... without trying to be too critical.... if I was a first-Gen Beatle fan, grieving over the breakup and then dusting myself off and rediscovering my enthusiasm as new solo offerings were on the cusp.... I'd have been underwhelmed with McCartney.... I do like McCartney 2, though.... also has some underwhelming tracks, but has some great tracks too.
Well, speaking as a first-gen Beatle fan, when McCartney came out we weren't really sure yet if they were breaking up. I loved McCartney (the album and the man!) especially Maybe I'm Amazed. We were definitely not "underwhelmed." Now when Macca II came out, I was underwhelmed. The only tracks I liked then were Coming Up and Waterfalls. I have since come to like (in a way) Temporary Secretary.
I would've been ultra-excited on hearing Maybe I'm Amazed as the first solo offering.... but too many instrumentals for me.... and whatever Kreen-Akrore is. But there are some gems. Junk is gorgeous. I was disappointed more on listening to McCartney 2 the first time, but it has grown on me more than McCartney as the years have rolled by. As per a previous thread, half a dozen of one and half a dozen of the other would be the biz.
-
Sgt._Pepper:
I've always found the "McCartney" album to be much stronger than "McCartney II". I like a lot more tracks on "McCartney", like "Junk," "Man We Was Lonely," "Maybe I'm Amazed," "That Would Be Something," "Every Night" and "Teddy Boy".
"McCartney" is a real classic: 5 top songs (all the tracks you mentioned except "Man WeWas Lonely", IMHO)
-
Luca:
Sgt._Pepper:
I've always found the "McCartney" album to be much stronger than "McCartney II". I like a lot more tracks on "McCartney", like "Junk," "Man We Was Lonely," "Maybe I'm Amazed," "That Would Be Something," "Every Night" and "Teddy Boy".
"McCartney" is a real classic: 5 top songs (all the tracks you mentioned except "Man WeWas Lonely", IMHO)
I agree with this...and the so called 'throw away' (aka 'filler') songs support the mood of the album as well...I'm not in love with every single song on this album...but there's nothing that leaves me shaking my head and asking why Paul added this song or that song to the final product
