[78-L] Beach Boys 78s

Cary Ginell soundthink at live.com
Sun Apr 17 15:25:50 PDT 2011

I suppose you'd have to ask EMI that. I'm sure their answer is that they wanted to issue a mainstream classic that would maximize sales. Nothing wrong with that. I'm sure the Beatles' representatives refused to permit a 78 of "Love Me Do" or any other of their titles for whatever reasons, otherwise EMI certainly would have done that. instead. The Beach Boys were their next biggest selling rock act, so I don't see a problem with it. It appears that some thought was put into doing this, otherwise, they would have just reissued the same old versions of the two songs that we've been hearing for decades. Instead, we get a "bonus" disc with two alternate takes, which I'm looking forward to hearing. So I'm sure EMI wasn't releasing "any old junk." These are two of the crowning achievements in the Beach Boys' recording career. I wouldn't exactly call that "off the wall." 

Record Store Day is fast becoming an exciting "holiday" for present-day vinyl junkies. Over 250 new releases were scheduled to be released specifically for Record Store Day (yesterday), with independent record stores offered the option of stocking them or not. It has not only given the vinyl industry a shot in the arm, but local Mom & Pop record stores as well as the few remaining chains, like Amoeba. I'm all for it and am glad to support what I think was a reasonable and savvy decision to repackage a classic, include something that few people have heard, and offer it in an unusual format that will maximize the sound quality. I'm only sorry I couldn't get to a record store yesterday to share in the excitement. 

I remember the days when I would go down to the local record store when a long-awaited new release was coming out. Those days were fun, and it's nice to see young people of another generation getting to experience that thrill as well. It's a win-win situation for everyone, so I don't see the harm in this at all.

Cary Ginell

> Date: Sun, 17 Apr 2011 22:06:22 +0000
> To: 78-l at klickitat.78online.com
> From: agp2176 at verizon.net
> Subject: Re: [78-L] Beach Boys 78s
> At 21:45 17/04/2011, CG wrote:
> >Would you refuse to buy a new recording made in the 78 format? If 
> >so, that disqualifies all of the R. Crumb/Cheap Suit Serenaders 78s, 
> >the John Fahey set, and the Bryan Wright Riveremont Bix Suite. If it 
> >plays at 78, we should be interested in it. Every new release, no 
> >matter what it is, keeps the format alive and contemporary, which is 
> >what our list is all about, isn't it?
> I have bought 'new' 78s -- such as the Tiny Tim from the UK, the 
> Randy Newman on Reprise. The Blue Shadows, Duke Special and Joe 
> 'King' Carrasco -- and I love 'em. I do not disparage the issuance of 
> new 78s, but rather the choice of material here as being totally off 
> the wall. To me it has a feeling of "let's throw any old junk out 
> there cause collectors will buy anything". Its like the companies 
> that created limited edition collectors edition box sets of McCartney 
> CDs back the early 90s by toss a regular off the shelf CD in a box 
> with a badge and sew on patch and saying 'Number 5464 of 10000' on the back.
> My point is -- why issue the Beach Boys on a 78? What point can it 
> possibly make about them as a group, the history of recorded sound, 
> or the nostalgic era of 78 rpm rock'n'roll.
> T
> _______________________________________________
> 78-L mailing list
> 78-L at klickitat.78online.com
> http://klickitat.78online.com/mailman/listinfo/78-l

More information about the 78-L mailing list