Anyone else who bought this, how does the image on the front compare to all the images one can find online? I was first alarmed to see that my copy is Made In China, but then read this: Pure McCartney | Beatles Blog » and if you go to Amazon's page and blow up the back cover, you also see Made In China. However, the front cover of mine is much darker than the images I see online, meaning that you see less of Paul's face. The image looks sharp enough, but the color seems a bit off, and someone has obviously cut out detail in the image. This is what Amazon shows: but on my cover everything above the shadow line across the middle of his forehead is blacked out. It s also harder to see his ear and chin. So, since this was obtained from a 3rd party via Amazon, I'm wondering whether it is a boot copy or not? (Remember all the issues with The Beatles boxes and fakes?) Any way to tell?
This is going to sound like a weird question, but what does it smell like? In my experience, the inks used in Chinese boots tend to have this pungent, rubbery smell to them (think burning rubber on the highway). That and a matte finish to the printing that almost feels sticky.
Ended up with Catch a Fire, Natty Dread, Uprising, Burnin, Rastaman Vibration and Babylon by Bus for $35. Awesome deal! Looks like the only two reissues that did not drop in price were "Live" and "Exodus."
Great! I think the ones i listened to sound excellent. Maybe not as good as the originals but for these ears, good enough!
Not a weird question, I did see posts about the 'smell' being a giveaway for fake Mono boxes. My copy is still in the shrink-wrap (as I was ready to return it when I saw Made In China, but before discovering the link I posted earlier), but there are two small tears along one seam, and I can't say that the smell is particularly obnoxious, just has that new book type smell. What caught my eye was the difference in the front image, and I would say that the copyright/publication/Made In China text on mine is bold, whereas this image from Amazon makes it appear lighter than the track text: How is the front cover image, does it match the one I posted earlier, how about the text at the bottom of the back cover, as black as the track text, or lighter as per the above image?
I'm wondering the same thing. My copy is also darker with much more of his head hidden in darkness. The picture is sharp though and it does look legit as far as print etc. The fact that it says made in China is probably a good sign because if it was a fake copy they would claim U.S or E.U. origin instead of China, I would think. My main concern is that my copy does not have the gold/silver sticker on the back, bottom left corner like the one shown above. All the recent Led Zep releases had a similar sticker on them. I always assumed this was to stop copies being made and sold as legit. I don't remember getting any other sets that were made in China. I'm not a fanatic about looking for this but I usually notice and most of my buys are items made in U.S., E.U., Canada or Mexico. I do hope China is not going to be a major source for CDs in the future. Not a good sign. Does anyone have a set "not" made in China? Anybody buy theirs from a U.K. source? Maybe all copies are from China? If this is a real problem a new thread should be started on the music forum so others will see this information. It is somewhat hidden here.
To confuse matters further, that sticker you see in the Amazon image has the SIAE logo on it, which is what you expect from discs made in Italy!! SIAE - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia » That is why I assumed my Manufactured In China copy was a boot, but you will notice that it says Manufactured In China underneath the sticker, and the link I posted earlier suggests Concord Music did indeed contract out manufacture of the 4 CD version to China. Which still does not preclude boot copies existing, of course.
I ordered mine thru Amazon Prime on June 16th for $31. It does not smell much and if anything the cover is a bit slippery. Made In China. I see the price has tanked since then which makes me suspicious that the market might be flooded.
Beatles - Hollywood Bowl cd Pre-order price $14.99 The Beatles - Live At The Hollywood Bowl - Amazon.com Music »
To some, I think the notion of including this track or -- even worse -- "Mary Had A Little Lamb" is ridiculous. It would have made me buy Pure McCartney, though, since at least then the package would have offered some new-to-cd tracks.
Respectfully disagree about Give Ireland Back to the Irish. At the time Paul/Wings released this, this song was very controversial in the U.K. and was banned from airplay. It was a bold political statement by McCartney, not just one of his Silly Love Songs.
I didn't realize those has been issued as bonus tracks to this album before. I'll have to look for this cd. Thanks.
OK, let me answer my own question about Pure McCartney 4 CD. I contacted Amazon, told them that I suspected that I had a pirated copy, and asked what I should do, and whether I should simply order from Amazon directly, as I assume that they only sell legit product. Answer confirmed that all their stuff is legit, and that I should feel free to return the product if I wasn't happy. Well, the Amazon bought copy just arrived, and I kept the pirate version until now to compare. Here are the differences I notice. printing in general on the official version is much cleaner. The spacing in the word PURE is wrong on the pirate, as the P almost touches the U. as expected, the front cover images are different. Firstly, we can see the detail in the shadow on Macca's forehead, and make out his hairline. The image of his face is much lighter, and more natural looking, especially the color of his nose, which is way off on the pirate. The official version allows more detail in his beard to appear, and you can see more of his ear which looks flesh-tone in color. the printing of the front-cover sticker is crisper and uses a thinner font line than the pirate. The use of a bold-like font on the pirate causes the catalog number to look blurred in comparison. the spine and back panel of the official version is an off-white (very light ivory) color, whereas the pirate is brilliant white. the printing of all song titles, (P), (C) and manufacture credits is much cleaner on the official version, and again looks to be in a lighter font, this is especially noticeable in the small font credits at the bottom of the package. So, there you have it. The pirate will be going back to Amazon (and 3rd party seller Cake Couck) tomorrow! If anyone is following a thread in Music about this release, please feel free to post the details of the official vs. pirated copies there, just in case others are not keeping an eye on this thread.
Sadly, you'll never prove to Amazon's satisfaction that it's counterfeit. So Cake Couck and who knows how many others will continue to fleece buyers.
Out of curiosity - Are you planning to leave negative feedback for seller "cake couck" to notify others to examine their product/purchase... the seller rating stands at 100% positive as of now?
You may be right, and Amazon may not care, especially now that I have bought an official copy from them, but I will point out the differences, and I will be returning the pirate at Amazon's cost. I see that I have a 'Will you rate your transaction' e-mail, so I guess so! Ouch!
Leave negative feedback, email Concord Records, and if there's an appropriate link, email McCartney's company as well. I don't think either of the latter will do anything, but it can't hurt to let them know...
