I strongly suspect that they've always been sensible, it's just that they choose not to explain the detail of the internal processes to a small bunch of whiny fans on the internet. As a result, that bunch of fans doesn't know what the issues are and chooses to assume that there aren't any and that the outcome is, therefore, the result of abject incompetence. Or something like that. If one assumes that every action is borne of some decision or event - even if one doesn't know what it was or agree with it - one will always be in a more contented frame of mind about the outcome.
True. Right from the start there's been a lack of communication, which inevitably leads to the vast amounts of speculation in these threads.
We have only one source (from a Danish website) that lists a release date of March 17, 2017. But so far, there is no other confirmation. So it all may be make-believe.
Oh, I don't mind the speculation. It's usually more fun than the discussion of the actual release (which pretty much ends the minute anyone gets hold of the thing). It's the logic that goes "I don't know the reason why x has/hasn't happened therefore it can only be stupidity/incompetence" that causes
There are some people who play the conditional "if ... then" game and make the leap that, as you opine, because MPL doesn't do things in the way that they prefer, then they must not know what they are doing and are less than competent. But that is human nature. We all do that from time to time, in evaluating businesses, discussing politics (especially the perceived fecklessness of someone in the opposing party), and so on. MPL is a business. So it is not immune from the syndrome. Having said that, and allowing for the possibility that sometimes the critics may well be right to some extent or another, maybe MPL in fact could do a better job of disseminating information. Press releases could be more expansive and detailed, as noted by some very legitimate and appropriate questions that have been raised in this page. They could be more timely and transparent in talking about future plans, for the Archive Collection or otherwise (ahem, how long ago was that Scott Rodger interview?), when they know that people are interested, more so as an entertainment-related company than a typical business. They could reach out to fans more directly, via this forum, their website, and otherwise, to seek input from informed people who could offer them a lot of good advice and ideas, free of charge. And Sir Paul himself could do more interviews, and share more direct information straight from the source, on the topic of his planned, announced releases, as opposed to treating pretty much all of his activities as CIA-level stealth operations conducted solely on a need-to-know, not-until-it-is-time basis. So, yeah, while you are right about some knee-jerk fans from time to time, I'm not prepared to absolve MPL of all blame for the disconnect that is expressed openly here, whether it be for the "Coming Soon" fiasco or the fact that so many otherwise rational people see them as a somewhat sloppy operation when it comes to PR matters. Just as some fans need to be more accepting of MPL's chosen business practices, sometimes MPL could raise its game and do a better job of communicating in a timely, informational manner. Here as elsewhere, the truth lies somewhere in the middle.
Unfortunately, that "small bunch of whiny fans on the internet" (as you so generously call us), are their core market. And one which is shrinking all the time. Partly due, I would venture, to abject incompetence.
Well, I include myself in that "small bunch" for what it's worth. And, yes, we are their core market as far as McCartney's solo career is concerned but that's only a very small part of what earns him his salary. I strongly suspect that the vast majority of his MPL income (I'm ignoring Beatles/Apple income) comes from the publishing side. So, from McCartney's perspective his Archive releases aren't about feeding a core market or maximising revenue from them; it's about getting his albums re-evaluated regardless of whether or not they sell. From McCartney's perspective I suspect its ALL about the Grammys and the critical re-evaluation. I strongly suspect that the bonus material is only grudgingly added to those releases because Concord insisted in the knowledge that without them, these releases wouldn't recoup their cost. I don't mean to suggest that this is a Good Thing. I could write reams (perhaps I should, for balance) on what I think he should do. But the wider point is that a thread full of 260 pages of moaning isn't likely to encourage anyone at MPL to delve into it deeply looking for clues, which is why I facetiously referred to us all as "whiny". And, for all the reasons I've outlined previously, we'll have to agree to disagree about whether the current situation is down to abject incompetence or simply your desire for product not matching MPL's which would, in fact, be nothing more than a difference of opinion as to what to do with the catalogue. I'd venture to suggest that insulting the very people you hope are reading this thread and taking notes as "abject incompetents" isn't likely to encourage them to deliver for you the product you want .
You may well be right about Paul's motivations for the Archive releases; but if all he cares about is winning the occasional obscure Grammy rather than bringing his amazing back catalogue to a new audience and giving his fanbase some real goodies from the vaults, I find that a bit sad. I'm not hearing about many new McCartney converts as a result of these releases. Certainly, he's not encouraging people to go out and discover them by performing songs from those albums in concert. And I'm not reading reviews from critics suddenly saying Pipes of Peace is a great album. But I do know long-term Macca fans who are not buying them because of the paucity of bonus material. As to your last point, I very much doubt anyone at MPL reads this thread, and would give a monkey's if they did. What I would imagine they do give a monkey's about, though, is making money; and I daresay they would forgive us questioning their competence or constantly ridiculing the 'Coming Soon' cards if they thought there was a chance of us splashing the cash on properly conceived and executed McCartney archive releases. In any case, I haven't criticised anyone at Capitol yet. I'm hopeful they will breathe new life into managing and promoting Paul's work.
I agree with pretty much all of this, for what its worth. When I get a moment, I'll have a go at putting forward my own "How I'd manage McCartney's catalogue" suggestions, just to garner some more Likes
I agree with you here, Paul. Or at least I wish to, in the sense of wanting to believe that this is what McCartney's bigger picture goal is for the program. (Actually, what I really think is that he is using the Archive Collection mostly as a showcase for what he considers to be his personal favorite or most meaningful solo albums, and he has cherry-picked accordingly.) For the sake of discussion, let's say that you are right, which likely is true to some extent or another, and analyze two things: 1) which albums most deserve future Archive Collection release based on the premise you note; and 2) how each release to date has done in that regard and what else it might have been about. 1) If McCartney seeks reappraisal of his albums that were undervalued at the time of release and likely are in line for a more favorable assessment now, I'd recommend these first and foremost: a) Back to the Egg. Unfairly trashed in 1979 (see the Rolling Stone review in particular), but it is an interesting and a unique sound for him that has aged well in the wake of grunge rock and a sort of return to the roots by more recent bands; b) Press to Play. Yeah, it sounds like a 1986 album, but so what? For many listeners it is a fun (if somewhat empty calorie) sound, and it was an engaging attempt to fit in with the times. It is worthy of a second chance with fresh ears. c) Red Rose Speedway. Actually there are some pretty nice songs there, solid melodies ("Little Lamb Dragonfly," "Get On the Right Thing," ...), but it somewhat has gotten lost in the shadow of its successor, Band On the Run, the movie song "Live and Let Die," and the subsequent Wings successes of the 1970s. Freed from that environment, I think listeners would like it better now. d) London Town. The overtly British sound and feel to the album was lost to a considerable extent upon an American audience, but I suspect the climate is better now for an objective listen and seeing the album more on its own merits and less as something of a low-energy letdown in the wake of the high-profile 1976 tour. e) Tripping the Live Fantastic. Yeah, really. Seeing McCartney on tour now is, for most of us, not a groundbreaking experience. But it was in 1989-1990, also the first time that he rolled out live so much of his Beatles output. It was a very emotional tour for many people, and a well-conceived Archive Collection package could capture the spirit of that moment, better still if the extra audio included a wide range of the soundcheck material that the band did as a sort of "concert before the concert" of all-different songs. And there is a wealth of video material to draw upon as well. f) Wild Life. Not a favorite of mine personally, but I can see why some find it a refreshing, distinctive entry in the McCartney catalog. Quite possibly a renewed focus upon it would make it more palatable to those who missed some of its charms earlier. 2) As for the Archive Collection releases to date, here is my own evaluation of what has been accomplished: a) Band On the Run -- perhaps the least effective reissue, as the album needs no reassessment and the bonus audio and video didn't add a whole lot to our existing knowledge -- although that first book did set the bar admirably high for quality with regard to subsequent entries. b) McCartney -- Again, this albums seems to have the same image and reputation that it did initially, and likewise the bonus material wasn't overly revealing. The book makes the package worthwhile. c) McCartney II -- Jackpot. Quite possibly the best reissue so far, for the wealth of bonus audio, some good video content, and a book that gave a lot of scope and focus to what was conceived largely in private. Many here seem to have gained an increased appreciation for the original album too, so this one can be stamped: mission accomplished. d) Ram -- Another sterling effort, with lots of good audio and supplementary text and photos. The MPL team did a great job in showing both that this album was underrated originally and why a renewed focus has brought better results. A very satisfying package. e) Wings Over America -- This was more about reminding people about Wings at its peak than a reassessment. Still, it works well, and it is a wonderful overview of and tribute to what most people -- including, it seems, Sir Paul -- call "the best Wings lineup of all" and the one to be most sentimental about. f) Venus and Mars -- Again, more of a reminder than a reassessment, in that the album always has been pretty well received. But the package again is attractive (even if the book feels noticeably fragile compared to its predecessors) and the bonus material is enjoyable. Alas, the muddy sound quality issue remains unresolved and counts as a sorely missed opportunity. g) Speed of Sound -- Gains some momentum for its sparkling sound and renewed attention to what each band member brought to the package. And the songs are better than most people remembered at the time. So I'd call this a worthy entry relative to our stated purpose here. h) Tug of War -- Being post-Wings (and even post-Lennon), it got somewhat less attention than its predecessors despite being arguably a better album than most. Thus it was a valid choice for reappraisal, and the extra remixed disc is a nice addition. i) Pipes of Peace -- Some interesting bonus audio, but aside from the book (which always adds important historical value), that's about as much merit as I can find in this one. I thought it was a weak album at the time and reassessment with more open ears didn't change that initial verdict for me. But I appreciate the effort on McCartney's part. Usually it works. Sometimes it doesn't. This one, to me, is a "doesn't." But I'm glad it's available just the same and I don't regret buying it. So my perspective anyway, for what the whole reassessment topic is worth. Bottom line: more McCartney albums deserve the same opportunity for a renewed moment in the sun and a more favorable second look. I hope Sir Paul sees it that way too, especially if (as you say) it isn't about making money so much as reestablishing his back catalog as an artist of world class status. Bring 'em on.
Most important word in that entire press release is "comprehensive" imo -- implying a campaign that won't have the holes in it that the Archive Collection does (did).
@freddiebell, you've knocked another one Out Of The Park. It really is wonderful to wake up to a post such as this. I agree with everything you've said in part 2 of your essay, although I'd add that my own suspicion is that Pipes of Peace was issued more as an opportunistic attempt to cash in on a) it's relationship to the more well-liked Tug of War and, b) the presence of Michael Jackson. Personally, I can't decide whether the new mix of Say Say Say (which focussed more on Jackson than it did on McCartney) was an act of incredible generosity, an attempt to publicly show that McCartney held no lasting ill-will toward Jackson (being conscious that all the negative comments he'd made over the years about Jackson's actions with regard to Northern Songs would remain in print in perpetuity, much like Lennon's rant to Jann Wenner now paints Lennon as being more anti-Beatles than he probably was in reality), or just a plain cynical attempt at getting some cred. As to part 1 of your prose; I agree that the albums that have been reissued so far are those that McCartney has the most fondness for and that his team felt were most likely to be positively reappraised. That being the case, I'm not as convinced as you that the albums you've listed would be likely to be well received. I think there's a point at which one needs to cut one's losses, and too many Oliver Twist-like "please sir, can I have some more [positive reviews]?" may well generate a mild backlash. Quit While You're Winning may well be the order of the day. That's not to say that I don't like the albums you've listed: I personally think they're all better than they're given credit for, I just don't hold out much hope of successfully convincing many others. I think the friction between fan base and MPL has occurred simply because we have a completely different set of goals to that which MPL has set. Ours is to see as many unreleased songs made available (including pulling together the many non-album or previously-unavailable-on-CD tracks) and getting better mastering than has previously been available. If those aims aren't shared by MPL, we're ALWAYS going to be at loggerheads. It's like constantly complaining that a fruit supplier keeps growing oranges when you want apples. That's really been the nub of my argument all along. What I'm hoping is that McCartney has scratched the itch for critical reappraisal and is now happy to just use his catalogue as a way to generate revenue. If that is the case, it's quite possible that he may let his new record company have a little more say or control over what gets released, on the basis that they know better how to extract most revenue from the vault. Both MPL and Capitol must be well aware that they're taking a real risk if they attempt to reissue his catalogue yet again. So, if they're going to, they really will have to go the extra mile to wipe away any sense of taking advantage of the fan base. I noted someone's point earlier that they were "out" if, for example, Band on the Run was reissued again, and I made the point that, while I'd be frustrated at having to buy it again, I gladly would do if the price point was right and the content was exciting. I guess the next game to play would be: what would it take to get you to buy album x again? If I can find some time over the next few days I'll put together some thoughts and, when I can get them into a coherent format, I'll post them here and see what folks think.
It's the clinging on to every last hope that proves to be so soul destroying at the end I can't recall the exact wording of the Concord press release but I remember us discussing the semantics of it. The release certainly suggested that the whole catalogue was going to be treated to wonderful new reissues without actually committing to doing so. In the end, releasing a handful of Archive Collection albums and putting the rest on iTunes fulfilled the wording of the press release even if it didn't match our expectations. And that's the campaign you're saying "has holes in it". A "comprehensive" release programme might still only feature a handful of really worthwhile releases and the rest dumped on iTunes, so I'm reluctant to hang my hopes on anything in that press release.
In my opinion, though, the most important word in that entire press release is "McCartney"---because I really don't want a comprehensive archival reevaluation for Barry Manilow.... Seriously, I wouldn't bank too much on that one use of the word "comprehensive". The exact sentence that uses the word says "McCartney is currently working on a new studio album, while a comprehensive plan for the artist's catalogue is being conceived by Capitol and Universal Music Enterprises (UMe) – in conjunction with the artist and his management team – and will be implemented beginning July 2017." To me, it sounds like the PLAN is comprehensive, and not that there will be a comprehensive and all-encompassing release of everything connected with Paul. It just sounds like the parties involved are going to create a PLAN (as opposed to just releasing random archive sets at random times, as has been the case with Concord). Maybe "consistent" or "well-thought-out" would have been a better choice of word instead of "comprehensive". Because the recent 4-CD PURE McCARTNEY compilation was "comprehensive", but it still had holes in it.
Actually, on that point, I tend to agree with Mr Murdock. To me, the use of the word "comprehensive" is key - as the Concord campaign has been anything but. Why would Capitol wilfully ignore certain albums when there's money to be made in remastering and repackaging them? You just need to look at what they're doing with someone like David Bowie. But maybe you're right. It's the hope that kills you.....
In all honesty I believe that some people here spend a lot more time trying to interpret every word in the press-release than the person who actually wrote the thing To understand what s goin on one instead should turn to a recent Nobel -prize winner "The answer my friend is blowin in the wind"
I certainly hope you and Sean are right. I just recall the prose used in the press release that announced McCartney's arrival on Concord. Remember these highlights?: "This exclusive global arrangement, will cover both physical and digital distribution of McCartney's treasured post Beatles catalog including landmark solo albums such as McCartney, Ram, McCartney II, Tug Of War, Pipes of Peace, Give My Regards To Broad Street, Press To Play, Flowers in the Dirt, Off the Ground, Flaming Pie, Driving Rain, Chaos and Creation in the Backyard, Memory Almost Full, and Good Evening New York City. The classic Wings albums include Wildlife, Red Rose Speedway, Band On The Run, Venus and Mars, Wings At The Speed of Sound, Wings Over America, London Town and Back To The Egg. The catalog also includes the inventive, highly regarded albums recorded under the McCartney pseudonyms Percy "Thrills" Thrillington, The Fireman and Twin Freaks. McCartney fans can look forward to an ambitious and rewarding reissue program beginning in August of 2010." Nowhere there did it say that every album was going to get a physical release, let alone an extended/expanded release, and yet I think we all assumed that that was the intention. As Arnold The G notes, "comprehensive" is suggestive of "complete" but doesn't necessarily have to be. I guess we all have our own opinions as to whether or not the Archive Collection (as it stands) could be called "ambitious and rewarding". Perhaps in ten years' time we'll be here discussing whether the Capitol catalogue turned out to be "comprehensive" or not.
I wonder if it will be as comprehensive as the legendary 2007 McCartney reissue program. May 13, 2007: Paul McCartney Catalogue for Digital Release "Parlophone, part of the EMI Group, has retained Paul McCartney's catalogue and is preparing a comprehensive re-launch, including new digital campaigns as well as physical re-releases."
So the pattern we're seeing here is that McCartney lets his label put together a plan and announce it and then he jumps ship
