Venus & Mars Deluxe McCartney Archive

They've already started doing it with the 2 live tracks "Eat At Home" and "Smile Away" released with the Ram archive release.

 

I don t take it seriously- really tried to like. Guess the music is ok but the awful lyrics and the really bad vocals makes it horrible imho

 

I think the vocals on the studio version are good, but the vocals on the live 1979 version are bad. I usually don't have a problem with Linda's singing, but that live version is not good.

 

You need to listen to some of the old 'novelty' 50's records

 

I do . Still doesn t like Cook of the house

 

Speaking of ruinous and regrettable…

Oops, I didn't know that. I have no idea how I got the impression it was Paul's made-up word. Thanks for the correct info.

 

Was Edward Lear also keen on using "dustbin lid"?

 

So far, "Soily", "The Mess", "1882" and "Why Do You Treat Me So Bad (Best Friend)" remain a sort of mystery regarding their studio versions. Let's say "The Mess" is the only one here with a rough studio trial...but very sparse.

 

were you going to say anything else?

 

Where do you come up with this stuff Arnie? It's brilliant!

 

Which is ashame, because if Paul had held off on Wild Life a few more months, he'd have
SIDE ONE/1. Soily/2. Best Friend/3. The Mess/4. Wild Life/SIDE TWO/1. Love Is Strange/2. Some People Never Know/3. Tomorrow/4. Dear Friend

That is a MUCH stronger debut for Wings

 

soooo true! He was on fire, but I have to say that this fire was extinguished much faster than he intended, as the album was postponed for weeks and weeks until its release. All in all, he could have held off until the rockers were ready to go. Like you say, it'd be really stronger than it turned out.

 

When you are behind bars, like I am, you have a lot of free time on your hands.... Arnie

 

Now that I think about it, I am really more in front of bars. Still with lots of free time on my hands, but I have to be careful that I don't fall over or pass out on anyone. Arnie

 

Unfortunately, this makes way too much sense for the business world. MPL is a business. And McCartney is a businessman now as much as he is a songwriter and musician.

The fan/consumer side of us sees the practicality of having all of that information in one convenient package -- one-stop shopping. But the business model says: why give something away at less than full market potential when they can parcel it out over several packages and ensure that much more of a revenue stream? They know that we, as core fans, will buy these releases no matter how much or how little they choose to put in them. So they opt for little, with the promise of more sales later on spread over more releases. It is disingenuous from a humanistic standpoint, but the perfect model for business success.

At least that's the case with the traditional business model. A select few are above the fray by nature of circumstance. What I don't really understand, as a Humanities guy and a non-businessman, is why McCartney, with a billion-dollar-plus fortune and secure legacy already at his back, doesn't choose to do things in a more comprehensive manner in the name of getting most to all of the substantive material out there, as opposed to waiting decades (e.g. after the first-generation audience is gone or nearly so) to do so and let in trickle out in drips and drabs if at all. Why not put out, for example, a reasonably comprehensive 5- or 6-CD box such as The Ram Collected Works, or The Red Rose Speedway Collected Works, etc., load it up with the most significant demos, early working/alternate versions outtakes, live versions, and other relevant tracks, and make that a truly all-encompassing overview of McCartney's most significant releases over the years -- not to mention relevant video, essays and other focused commentary, etc.? Fans would love it. Historians would gain much useful information from it. Sales expectations, given the size and price of the package, necessarily would be kept to a minimum, making the commercial factor less of a consideration. And so on. Maybe that, too, makes too much sense. Somehow.

 

I think if the live "Cook of the House" had been included, people would complain about it for years. It would be the gratuitous dig tacked on to every criticism of the Archive series.

"Why isn't 'Indigo Moon' on the Flowers in the Dirt reissue? Was it deemed less essential than the live 'Cook of the House' on Speed of Sound?"

"What is a 2015 live version of 'Here Today' doing on the Tug of War bonus disc? Oh well. At least it's not another version of 'Cook of the House.'"

"Ugh. Still no release date for the Memory Almost Full reissue? I guess I'll listen to the live 'Cook of the House' again."

 

You are incredibly spot-on with this. I would have been annoyed out of my mind. Thank goodness I only have to read those comments in your post.

 

I find myself nodding in agreement and - at the same time - shaking my head in sadness at the wasted potential of all this. (Which, of course, is making me very dizzy and ricking my neck.)

I guess there's an argument of principle: just because McCartney doesn't need the money it, perhaps, doesn't mean that he should devalue the work he's produced over the years. I don't mean in terms of it's historical/artistic value, I mean financially.

I'm sure he's commented in interviews that he still has that working class ethic: a good day's pay for a good day's work and, perhaps, he feels that he still owes it to himself to recoup as much from his efforts as he feels it deserves.

Of course, this may all be bunkum: perhaps the Archive Collection is being presented as it is for no other reason than that a bunch of staffers know they'd be out of a job the minute McCartney's archive is exhausted. That seems a bit harsh to me but, well, it's possible. McCartney, for all his hard-headedness will be guided by what his advisers tell him. And if they have a vested interest in the decisions he makes, well...

I do still hold out the expectation that, when all is said and done, fans will have a remarkable archive of music from the greatest songwriter of our age. It's just that we won't have it in a series of convenient, efficient, sensible, releases: we'll have it scattered across the whole of our collection, requiring us to curate things as we see fit. Which actually offers the opportunity for a little fun...

 

Okay, I've just spotted something that is gonna blow this thread WIDE OPEN. The cover artwork for Venus and Mars IS WRONG. Look at the colours of the balls in the title:


Now look at the original:


@knarf: call putting the release back a week a "clusterf..."? This is a "clusterf..."...

Perhaps I know why the release has been delayed...

 

That's it -- pre-orderer cancelled!

 

I must admit, I was quite staggered when I spotted it. I'm actually surprised no one else has before me. Really, I'm stunned...

 

Wow! I didn't notice that, but I did notice the blue backdrop, which wasn't on the original.

 

Sorry, I can't muster anything more than pretend outrage for this one. It's odd that they'd change the colors, but ... I just don't care! I think the new cover looks great.

 

Let's see whether it's a matter of digital graphics or the real thing. I'll judge it in the very moment I put my greasy hands on those beauties.