A Fantasic Live At The Beeb! (Valkyrie VAL-100)

[20YearsAgo]

Probably the most insightful observation in this thread "Fantasic" as in 'Fantasy' rather than a simple spelling mistake.

Only problem is it doesn’t exist in the English language. Fantasy live at the Beeb would have made more sense.

That's true. What did you think of "In His Own Write" and "Spaniard in the Works" ? It's word play and not everyone is into it, actually John stopped using it in his songs because people would read too much into it. I guess it's something you either appreciate or you don't.

This is way way off track... and way too schoolmaster pedantic of me, but I'm inclined to take harrythebannister's view on this. I'm all into Joycean/Lennonesque wordplay but the Valkyrie usage here seems more like a translation error than anything else. Or a misprint.

As wordplay, it's very poor. Why? Well, we get that the "Fantas" part of the word plays on "fantasy" or "fantastical."

But, if intentional, what would the "sic" part of the term mean? Is it a play on "sick" (i.e., "ill" or "unhealthy" or "not well")? Or is it a play on "sic," a rare Latin term that English editors insert to alert readers that whatever was just quoted in the article they're reading was incorrect or erroneous? Or "sic" as in what you might say when commanding a vicious dog to maul someone? None of these allusions are complimentary.

[stereoman33]

this is terrible

[dascottjr]

A fun listen, if nothing more. Gives me hope for a remaster of "Foretaste".

[bulldog1969]

Thank you for sharing

[Choking Smoker]

Only problem is it doesn’t exist in the English language. Fantasy live at the Beeb would have made more sense.

That's true. What did you think of "In His Own Write" and "Spaniard in the Works" ? It's word play and not everyone is into it, actually John stopped using it in his songs because people would read too much into it. I guess it's something you either appreciate or you don't.

This is way way off track... and way too schoolmaster pedantic of me, but I'm inclined to take harrythebannister's view on this. I'm all into Joycean/Lennonesque wordplay but the Valkyrie usage here seems more like a translation error than anything else. Or a misprint.

As wordplay, it's very poor. Why? Well, we get that the "Fantas" part of the word plays on "fantasy" or "fantastical."

But, if intentional, what would the "sic" part of the term mean? Is it a play on "sick" (i.e., "ill" or "unhealthy" or "not well")? Or is it a play on "sic," a rare Latin term that English editors insert to alert readers that whatever was just quoted in the article they're reading was incorrect or erroneous? Or "sic" as in what you might say when commanding a vicious dog to maul someone? None of these allusions are complimentary.

I think that the only way I could respond without being pedantic is that it’s either deliberate word play as I suspect or a simple spelling mistake as I think you are leaning towards believing.

[harrythebannister]

That's true. What did you think of "In His Own Write" and "Spaniard in the Works" ? It's word play and not everyone is into it, actually John stopped using it in his songs because people would read too much into it. I guess it's something you either appreciate or you don't.

This is way way off track... and way too schoolmaster pedantic of me, but I'm inclined to take harrythebannister's view on this. I'm all into Joycean/Lennonesque wordplay but the Valkyrie usage here seems more like a translation error than anything else. Or a misprint.

As wordplay, it's very poor. Why? Well, we get that the "Fantas" part of the word plays on "fantasy" or "fantastical."

But, if intentional, what would the "sic" part of the term mean? Is it a play on "sick" (i.e., "ill" or "unhealthy" or "not well")? Or is it a play on "sic," a rare Latin term that English editors insert to alert readers that whatever was just quoted in the article they're reading was incorrect or erroneous? Or "sic" as in what you might say when commanding a vicious dog to maul someone? None of these allusions are complimentary.

I think that the only way I could respond without being pedantic is that it’s either deliberate word play as I suspect or a simple spelling mistake as I think you are leaning towards believing.

Not word play at all....if so I’m not laughing. This is simply a spelling mistake. It should read “fantastic” which it almost certainly isn’t, and as there is “Tom-fakery” involved (that’s wordplay) then it at least should hint to it on the artwork. Some poor soul will have shelled out hard earned cash for this dud.
As I said, I fear this is the way bootlegs are heading. Who’s going to know what is real or not. Someone not as knowledgeable as we are, may think they have an upgrade or something new here.

[Choking Smoker]

This is way way off track... and way too schoolmaster pedantic of me, but I'm inclined to take harrythebannister's view on this. I'm all into Joycean/Lennonesque wordplay but the Valkyrie usage here seems more like a translation error than anything else. Or a misprint.

As wordplay, it's very poor. Why? Well, we get that the "Fantas" part of the word plays on "fantasy" or "fantastical."

But, if intentional, what would the "sic" part of the term mean? Is it a play on "sick" (i.e., "ill" or "unhealthy" or "not well")? Or is it a play on "sic," a rare Latin term that English editors insert to alert readers that whatever was just quoted in the article they're reading was incorrect or erroneous? Or "sic" as in what you might say when commanding a vicious dog to maul someone? None of these allusions are complimentary.

I think that the only way I could respond without being pedantic is that it’s either deliberate word play as I suspect or a simple spelling mistake as I think you are leaning towards believing.

Not word play at all....if so I’m not laughing. This is simply a spelling mistake. It should read “fantastic” which it almost certainly isn’t, and as there is “Tom-fakery” involved (that’s wordplay) then it at least should hint to it on the artwork. Some poor soul will have shelled out hard earned cash for this dud.
As I said, I fear this is the way bootlegs are heading. Who’s going to know what is real or not. Someone not as knowledgeable as we are, may think they have an upgrade or something new here.

No I think it's taking things too far too. I don't mind The Beatles' work being enhanced but definitely not replaced.

[BTL1210]

Thanks for the warnings posted - Have now deleted it ....

[Liverpools Boy]

Yep. We're going to see a lot more fakery. Demixing can be a wonderful tool. Some of the things that people produce and share here outright amaze me. I'm thinking, for instance, of the EdinSc sets. He at least keeps his work "honest." Here, they're flying in non-Beatle inputs like mad. Sooner or later, we'll here these tracks synched up to 30-piece orchestras. Or Jimmy Page-like guitars. Or have some hip-hop artist laying vocals over the raw demixed bass lines.

Part of me wants to scream.

But also though, to the uninitiated, these don't *sound* that bad. If you toss aside the ideas of truth and honesty and maintaining fidelity to the source materials, you could even say some of these tracks sound better than existing tapes.

So, there's nothing new? and/or like a new source for the BBC recordings? The Lord Reith's The BBC Archives remain as the the best project in terms of sources, completeness, etc?

[Megazeti]

Cam someone re-up this please
Thank you in advance