The Smiley Smile Message Board

http://www.showbiz411.com/2015/01/11/exclusive-paul-mccartney-reboots-beatles-catalog-for-neil-youngs-pono-music-player

Would love for the BBs' catalogue to be made available properly in this format. McCartney's agreement to allow the Beatles catalogue to be used in this way could be something of a game-changer that will lead even more to follow suit.

Thoughts?

Wow, talk about bring out the big guns!

Anyway, I'm in for a BBs high res! 

And wouldn't this be a doddle given the work Alan and Mark have already put the hard yards into transferring the catalogue (and more!) to high res digital (24bit/88.2khz)?  Beats me, but once the tedious business model is worked through, the gear is already to rock - so I imagine less of a stretch than researching and compiling AAA projects.

I and others have commented, while expressing sheer delight and buckets of gratitude, the copyright renewal projects would be even more appreciated (infinity + 1 style) in high res, as opposed to iTunes Big Mac offerings.

Perhaps we can get Al to pono-y up to Neil for Neil's guest vox on Postcard via approving a high res release?

Mono mixes only tho'.

And only available in FLAC.

Mono and stereo mixes in FLAC at a fair price (PLEASE) would be great. Keep the dynamic range compression to a minimum, strive for accurate edits (some not-so-accurate edits made it to the 2012 mono/stereo releases), and yeah - it'd be great. GREAT. THIS IS GREAT. GOD DAAAAMN, THIS IS GREAT. LOOK! THEY'RE GONNA KILL THAT GUY. ISN'T THAT GREAT.

Oh, and, y'know, a complete catalog being available at once would be cool, too. :(

Boring Boring Boring. You want the best sound, buy LPs 

Reading thru from last April, here's the kicker on the Pono waste of time:
 http://www.techhive.com/article/2138484/is-high-resolution-audio-really-as-good-as-it-sounds.html

Hi-res digital is usually even higher quality than an LP can offer and, more importantly, isn't a totally inaccurate way of presenting music like vinyl is. Vinyl isn't even technically "higher quality" than a standard redbook CD when you really weigh the pros and cons of both. Sorry.

ah well, your mind is made up. Doesn't matter to me either way, as I'm not buying into it. But I read the article

But YOUR mind is obviously made up, too. :'( Hi-res digital offers frequencies that meet or are above that of vinyl all while presenting the recordings as accurately as possible, which vinyl cannot do nearly as well.

My mind is made up on account of I don't hear much do to hearing loss and so have no need of higher res even if it would present better, which, according to this read it seems not
Partial quote:
>> Overhauling your music library can be an expensive proposition. But at least the improved quality you’ll enjoy in return will be worth it, right?
 
Not really, says Christopher “Monty” Montgomery, a digital audio engineer who heads the non-profit Xiph.org Foundation that’s responsible for the Opus, Ogg Vorbis, and FLAC digital audio codecs. There may be problems with digital audio, Montgomery contends, but high-resolution 24/192 audio doesn’t solve any of them.
 
Instead, Montgomery says, when you buy into high-resolution audio, all you end up with is a healthy dose of pseudoscience and bigger hard drive requirements for storing files that can be up to six times larger than what you get on a CD.
 
The problem with high-resolution audio? To put it bluntly: you can’t hear the difference between high-resolution audio and a CD. <<

You and I weren't talking about that, though.

Hi res digital sounds good. Vinyl sounds very good as well with a slightly bigger investment for decent turntable and pickup. Plus it holds extra fascination for collectors, such as bigass. Both sound great thru a nice amp and really big speakers. What are we arguing about!!? Why are we fighting! I think I know all I can know about runners preferring digital and bgas (and many others here) preferring LP.

rdz never should have never been set off in the first place.
* I knew that was gonna happen when Rick Bartlett mentioned *Summer in paradise sounding great on vinyl".  I KNEW THAT WAS GONNA HAPPEN

please refresh1!!!!!!

Really?  I thought I was

What I love MOST about vinyl...other than trying to remember if it's spelled Vynil or Vinyl...but vynil just NEVER looks right once I see it...is the homey sound of bacon frying and corn kernals popping.  Those kitchen like remembrances also argue for attention on well appreciated and foolishly leant vinyl.  And of course a needle once spent can also render vinyl next to useless.  [we're not even gonna begin to delve into 78s or 45s or those little plastic things which you need for the stupid holes in the records...and piling loose change on the tone arm to keep the dang thing from skipping...]

That of course helped  prompt the idea of 8 tracks.  NO snap, crackle or pop.  NO rice crispies.  Just songs which stopped mid-verse...clicked through the process and then continued when the clicking thing had completed running its course.  Tape getting caught in the machine was also an exciting moment.  I recall owning a reel to reel [7 inch spool] version of Best of Volume 2 as well.  But reel to reel was never gonna catch on with the average Joe or Josephine.  Rearranging the song order from the album was also an added bonus on 8 tracks.  I guess they knew that we would eventually do that too.  Rearrange and add to or subtract from or at least interject different versions of the original song into place.  Those musicians didn't and still don't know squat.  Muse?  What's a muse...  It needs *MY* ic[ k ]

Thank gawd for cassettes.  [and another method for buying the music yet again...unless you invested in enough equipment and made your very own 'personalized' cassettes.  But THAT usually took us back to vinyl.  "Pop, Pop, Pop...Pop Poperanne."  Sony walkmans weren't too expensice and didn't usually stretch and break the tape like many of the other more 'reasonably priced' gizmos did.  Once proliferation of those was thought to be near complete...we got saved just in the nick of time...with compact discs.  [which I still use in vast profusion]   They've only been upgraded numerous times.  And, of course, so too has the source used to make the cds.  Surround Sound?  sh*t yes!!!  Who do I pay?

Heh!!!  Let's put out some stuff in stereo that was only mono before.  That'll sell.  Here's a few bonus tunes you didn't [ officially ] own before either.  The rest?  Well they're GREAT songs you need to own two or three or four copies of.  Wanr some extended mixes?  GOT THOSES FOR YA TOO!!!  Hey look collectors!!!  The same old same old with a new cover and a different order.  And surely you want to be loyal, noble and true blue to your favourite artist and NOW pay to have that which you dutifully hunted down back when you were a fan so loyal that you would fly across an ocean to see a show and get your ear drums on some audio gold.

Hey want some different versions of what you already have?  Want an album we never released?  We have more of those you know...stupid record companies!!!  Hey look...Jimmy Page has included companion discs!!!  Garth Hudson found 7 more BASEMENT tapes!!!  Abba is still Abba even if you play it backwards!!!

Everybody got everything?  Your favourite group farting?  What's her face singing while feeding her dog?  Something 'they' recorded before they could actually play an instrument or sing?  [no wait that's today's top 40]  OK...What's next?

Get out your wallets...here come hi-res. :hat

The line forms here...>

Where's my wallet? ???

Wait. you forgot to mention 4-Track carts and Playtapes

 :lol

Thanks for this Add Some. You brought a Smile to my face.  My sentiments as well.

Sorry? You don't have to apologize for your opinion.

However, vinyl degrades every time you play it. Doesn't matter how high end the equipment, you're still scratching a piece of plastic with a sliver of gemstone. No contact - no sound.

Funny and so true, Andrew.

And Add Some...pennies on the tone arm!  :lol

Who knew we'd come so far, for ease, but maybe sacrifice some quality in the process.  Tangled cassettes in the soccer van, and tired, hungry kids in the back seat.  McDonalds "cuisine" for dinner!  ;)

Pennies 'filled'?   On songs like 'Hey Little Cobra'...I needed manhole covers. :lol

when the industry gets it together to introduce something that is

compact
funky (not like PONO)
highest quality sound
reasonably priced

then 40 plusses in particular will be falling over themselves to upgrade their collection of most cherished music.

I'll reserve judgement on that possibility until my ears and wallet have had a chance to vote.  BUT...

Right now...off of my cds purchased and/or homemade...through my in-house PA system and via the cd players in my car and back yard...I hear music that is as good...if not better than BEING THERE.  How much better can it really get?  Orchestras...let alone bands...don't surround me when they perform.  We surround them.

As we head into the retirement years...completely changing out the library and the devices to play the music on will not be at the top of the list on the daily, weekly, monthly budget for the average couple...or individual.

Unless you're a hermit...there will be the hope of holding up your end at the pub...let alone paying the bills which factor into just living.  Maybe a trip once in awhile as well.

But my ears will have their say.

------------------------------------------------

Like...upgrade the system[ s ] you have to PLAY the music you own now.  THAT'll be cheaper than replacing the whole library.  At least it will for the folks who already own a whole heap of music.

I support Vinyl AND Hi-Res. But only if said Hi-Res is mastered (i.e. Unlimited) well, like the McCartney Reissues, and the new Weezer LP.

Also, just a word to remind people that, yes, you can get One Direction' music in Hi Res, but not The Beach Boys'

HDTracks.com already has a number of hi-res Beach Boys albums, including SMiLE.