Why wouldn't you? Also, again, I can get a new 2009 remaster of what you are looking for anyways, so it's a moot point.
Well... On Fnac online, you can see them but it is written "stock épuisé" There is actually one Pepper CD, yes. On the Cultura website, when it's written 2017, 2018 or 2019, that means it's the remixes even if they don't say it. And I cannot find any 2009 Lp for those three titles. In real shops, everywhere I go, I don't see any more CDs or Lps of the three albums. (I know, because I always look for them for my daughter )
HMV in Bath has not had the 2012 released LP stereo mixes (2009) of Pepper, White or Abbey Road for a while now. Just the Giles remixes and some very high prices.
Good for you and me if we want too. The thing is if someone wants to buy a brand new vinyl copy of Abbey Road now, not a worn or expensive second hand one, they aren't going to get Abbey Road that all four Beatles heard. As far as I'm concerned that's wrong. If you think differently, fair enough, I mentioned that kind of thing in my first post.
I must admit it is surprising you can't buy it on CD but I guess a symptom of the decline of the medium. A few years from now might be none of them in print! And of course if you're a mono aficionado you've never been able to buy them on CD individually. Not saying this is a good thing but the way of things. Time to buy now - I doubt there would be many who would want them on CD though who haven't already got them, hence deletion from the catalogue.
One thing about Beatles fans that I find odd (and probably other bands as well) is how much it matters to some how popular the Beatles are currently and will be in the future. Worrying about what other people they don't know think about the band. The Beatles could have been the most obscure band in history but it wouldn't impact how much we enjoy their music. Their popularity in 50 years time should be of no concern at all to us. All that really matters is what The Beatles music means to us as individuals. Some of our favourite bands are obscurities that have never been popular and it doesn't seem to matter as much as the continuing popularity of the fabs. If I was the only Beatles fan in the world it wouldn't matter, it wouldn't affect the way their music makes me feel and I believe it shouldn't matter to any fan of any band that no longer exists. I understand some of the displeasure in the presentation and packaging of the music but, ultimately, these things are out of our control and I think it's best to just accept things as they are and put on our favourite version of our favourite Beatles album instead. It's much more enjoyable to listen to The Beatles than fret about them.
Nowhere has in the UK, unless some shops have unsold copies from years ago, which would take some doing considering the popularity of this album. In the UK at least, I don't know about other countries, the original mixes are slowly being replaced with the Giles remixes as far as buying brand new copies goes. This isn't just my opinion. It's happened with three of their most famous albums. It'll probably be only temporary though and purely for business and marketing reasons.
There is a bit of a, "how can we top ourselves" ethic to this whole thing. But then again, most people were able to understand the concept of a "stereo soundstage", because most people had been to see a show where players were on a stage, left-to-right. The further refinements, while obvious to the engineer and the critical music fan, seem superfluous to a casual listener who thinks of the experience as "more sources than I have ears, so why is that necessary". Even when you show this to a casual listener, and even IF he gets it, he's still going to have a problem with paying for it, and seeing it as essential. I honestly have no idea where ATMOS fits into my world: is it an enhancement of "realism"...or, is it an effect-laden gimmick that makes you want to focus on hearing music from places you wouldn't expect a performer to be positioned. Do I need this level of impressionism in my listening...and, how far am I willing to go to get it from every source I can, that I already know what they're "supposed" to sound like. I can see it in a larger ensemble, such as a big band, where stretching out the soundstage allows you to hear each performer more intricately. But...when they were assembled to play together as an ensemble in the first place...what is the point of making them stretch soli lines and chord structures, further apart...?
My understanding is Atmos was designed to be an enhancement for home theatre and cinemas. Which I get ... I guess? Honestly, for me watching movies at home in 2.0 is more than enough. As it is for music.
Sadly, very true, but the vinyl market is significant and slowly still growing. Of course the days of physical media being mainstream are long gone. It is impressive how many young people are buying records though. I never saw that coming. I don't know how they afford it!
Uh, I just checked Amazon. All the Beatles' stuff is still in-print. You can sleep well tonight, Fab purists.
Here's the problem: it's something you want. That's fine, but you are attributing that desire for the entire public. Which is not reasonable, and is ultimately selfish. The harsh reality is that vinyl has been on it's way out for some time. It's only "alive" for nostalgia fetishists. Furthermore, those folks already own Abbey Road; why would they want a new copy of it? Ergo, it's not important if it's still being pressed. It's not even a relevant medium. But if the argument is for "But what about future generations! They won't hear the originals!" then @edenofflowers already hit the nail: you or I are not the masters of the archive, nor dictate what is or is not important. What we want is irrelevant, especially when taking future generations into account. Will future generations even be listening to vinyl? No, they'll probably be listening on some digital medium, and will probably have the knowledge that the data of both the 1987, 2009 and Giles remixes are available at their fingertips in some universal, digital archive of all human artistic creation. I'm sorry you think I'm being pedantic or antagonistic, but that's also how the Giles-haters come off. I am just continuing the dialog here. If you don't want to have a dialog, I'm not sure why you posted in the first place.
Who cares. I don't. What came out on vinyl in the 60's isn't what is on the master tapes, which isn't what's on the multitrack tapes, which isn't what the band sounded like in the studio while tracking. Nostalgia is all that ties everyone to the "canon" first run issues from the 60's. Anyone who came along later is hearing the band through a different lense, in some cases better, in some cases worse, in most cases just different.
This is a logical distillation. But for me, 5.1 is simply stereo-in-3D. Life is in 3D. But surround is an opportunity to do more than just give you a closer look into a stereo image, and anybody who's listened to Flaming Lips surround, knows what that sort of "mind candy" can be. But I would still be satisfied with 5.1 as a "stereo" medium that enhances the original intention of the stereo mix first created by the artist. I see 5.1 making bonkers mixes bouncing around the room as just gravy for me, and I can see why more traditional music fans wouldn't have the toleration for it.
