E-minor7

Revolver's already out - Rubber Soul is in the mold. Well, I like the old mixes refreshed/mastered. New mixes are risky territory - and the Fab-camp knows it. Because of that they most of the time appear to be acceptable. Some of them reveal new details on the tracks, , , slightly different possibilities. And sure, the latter is dangerous and must be restricted/prohibited in the future. .

Sounds great - hope you'll be able to keep your musical soul'n'spirit intact in the whirlwind of tonal activities. Btw. what is a wind synthesizer ? And apart from that my Q was about your thoughts as sax-player on The Beatles' use of saxophone.

Eehh, , , it's the the second time it appears in this thread. I now wait for the psychedeli c version. . .

^ 🍏

Jearrrhh - him Winston could be so cruel. .

They were right. Not sure if he was one of few, but Starr was immaculately good. Yet not a typhoon which became more and more attractive plus minus 1970 and onwards.

Absolutely - and this is probably 1963. Never seen this particular shot before. My father came home with the She Loves You/I'll Get You single for me and they wore the same lapel-less suits on the front. Don't forget the ultra-kool mid-phase btw. The looser or freer not yet hippie-style 1965-66.

😆 Out on thin ice there. Guess the Fabs laughed their caps off. .

I would like to know how you as a sax-player (and perhaps colleagues) characterize The Beatles' relation to the saxophone.

Heps for a weighty comment. Maybe you should post it in the Lounge-thread Do the Beatles music hold up to modern music also. The whole copyright issue is always a serious territory to enter. I remember reading a CSN&Y book, which also had a diary-like calendar. It informed about how the guys registered just after writing, not releasing a song. Probably so they could play it live - but also so that no jerk would steal the melody while recording. SO many ways things can leak from that vulnerable phase. .

Okay - still according to the famous Polecastro-film, the X is placed on the same spot while the rest of the top-braces differ.

That's a fair vote ^

Yeah, , , but it also shows HOW good their early stuff was. .

And through the time machinery >>>>>>>

I'd like to ask a thing : Will the sound go muddy/unclear (a bit rubberband-like🥺) when the strings on your HD-28 fades. Happens with my HD-28V - otherwise a topz-magnificent guitar.

I was there - but very young, , , still had and enjoyed the records. You probably won't be able to imagine how big they were. That means everywhere - also in the camps that didn't understand or like them. When Alfred himself joins the wave there not much left to discuss - says it all. Don't know what he thought of the band, but he sure drummed the vibe up. . .

Very good - and it offers a little platform for afterthought, doesn't it. .

Might grow on you - did on me. My prob is the production = Too much soup 1/3 in and through out. As we acoustic players know, music not least arises in the pausing. And where are those Paul & (cleaned-up) John uni-vocals we treasure so much, , , plus a clear George signature to be found. All in all I let my 💚 win though. It's the path to choose here. . .

>` R I N G O ´<

>` B I N G O ´ <

Thing is that it's more than a band - much more. This happens when a rock-act gets big enough. A handful of groups managed to get there over the years. .

Yes -

video features a (for me) never before seen Gibson ~ , , , , , in their hands.

There it was - one can hear OWF sensed the old tune. Knew what it is about.

! Ditto !