McCartney and Starbucks: it's a done deal

Your theories about the possible nature of this Hear Music deal are interesting, and are certainly a possibility. Right now, given what we know about this deal, it isn't out of line to treat this a bit like artists doing one-off specialty releases through an alternate label. It's just that often an artist will do this with a live album, or album of outtakes or something, while McCartney is trying this with a new studio album. Still, given the possibility that the album is made up of some material that has been in the can for awhile, it is easy to wonder if McCartney in some way is treating this album release on some level as having an outlet for some leftover material to test the waters with this new label.

On the other hand, Apple taking the Beatles catalog is much more involved process. First, as far as I know, there is simply a pending case where Apple is seeking ownership of the masters. I don't know all of ins and outs of that case, but I would imagine it will take quite a bit for Apple to gain full ownership of the catalog. As of right now, and I would guess for the foreseeable future, EMI still owns the Beatles' catalog. The only thing Apple got in past from EMI was the right to control what EMI issues. Before that late 80's case, EMI was able to issue previously released Beatles recordings however they wanted (i.e. "Love Songs", "Reel Music", etc. Currently, while EMI still owns the recordings, Apple has to sign off on any new release, whether it's a reissue of an old album or a new compilation like "1." But I would tend to doubt that a court will grant Apple full ownership of the recordings. EMI did pay for them to be made back in the 60's. I suppose Apple would have to demonstrate some huge lapse that EMI made in handling the recordings to be granted ownership. As I said, I don't know all of the details of that newer Apple-EMI case, but it seems like the main issue is royalty payments. I'm sure there are provisions in laws where a company mishandles things financially to the point that they have to forfeit ownership of copyrights to an item (i.e. sound recordings in this case), but it would have to be a pretty extreme case I would guess. Even if every Beatles release doesn't go stright to #1, and even if EMI as a company is not doing great business, the Beatles catalog still has to be perhaps the most valuable set of recordings that exist. I don't think EMI will lose the rights.

 

Do we know for a fact that this album consists of "leftover" material? Like I noted above, I know that Nigel Godrich fired Paul's band during the Chaos and Creation sessions, but, from what I read, he fired them basically on day one of those sessions. I don't think they had finished one song before Godrich dismissed the band. Further, given the publicity that this move from EMI to Starbucks is already generating, I just can't see Paul giving them a Pipes of Peace-style leftover album to work with. He is moving to this new label because he wants to sell more records than Chaos and Creation sold, and I can't see him bringing anything less than his A-game to the project. Again, I think Paul's creative renaissance began before Chaos and Creation, with Run Devil Run and Driving Rain, and I personally would be very happy to get another band album on the level of quality of Driving Rain.

 

One song on the album was recorded by the band -- Follow Me?

 

I'm no expert, either, but something tells me that the costs of recording and production of the Beatles recordings back in the 60s have been recouped by EMI countless times over.

But if memory serves, Apple is making exactly that claim - that EMI has breached Apple's trust in the fidelity of their deal, through repeated mishandling and questionable bookkeeping regarding royalties. Apple's sued EMI over it before, and if they're able to prove that EMI just keeps on pulling the same old same old...

 

We of course don't know what type of material will be on this album. But I'm not talking about leftovers from any Godrich-produced group sessions. In a number of interviews with several different people, it has been described that there were a number of songs recorded with Kahne during the "Driving Rain" sessions that were left off but considered for future release. In addition, I have read that there were post-Driving Rain, pre-Chaos sessions with the entire band that were also produced by Kahne. So there is plenty of pre-Godrich/Chaos group material produced by Kahne to work with.

By best guess would be that the groundwork for this new album will indeed by the previous tracks worked on with Kahne. I'm sure some additional work has been done with the tracks. I don't think there was a "Driving Rain 2" sitting on the shelf, mixed and mastered and ready to go before "Chaos." But given that Kahne is at the helm on this new album, and there are many descriptions of a good deal of as-yet unreleased pre-Chaos sessions produced by Kahne, it's a fair guess that this new album will integrate that slightly older material to some degree. I'm not saying McCartney is trying to throw bad scraps out there. I don'tg think he went from sessions with Kahne and the touring band to the one-man-band concept with Godrich with the idea that the Kahne stuff would never be issued. I think the plan has always been to revisit the other Kahne material.

 

It wouldn't be the first time.

 

I'm sure the costs have been recouped, but I guess the whole idea behind EMI investing money in the beginning was that they were putting out money on an unknown with the idea that the benefit would be to make all that money if they had made a good investment. In other words, I don't think an argument Apple could use to get the rights to the recordings would be "EMI has made their investment back." As you say, the possible mishandling of finances can perhaps be an argument. I still tend to doubt that EMI will lose all rights to the catalog. I would think larger royalties or more money paid out would be more likely. If they don't settle this case and it actually goes to trial, then it would be a number of years before it would all get sorted out to the point that Apple was reissuing the Beatles stuff on a new label. But ya never know!

 

As all McCartney fans know, the guy is so prolific that he is probably sitting on ten to twenty CDs worth of unreleased material from his entire solo career. Like I said, I am a big fan of Driving Rain, and wouldn't mind Driving Rain 2 at all.

 

Certainly, although I think even when he has done that in the past, he had some sort of faith in the material at that time, or at least perhaps was trying to convince himself it was good.

But it wouldn't make sense for McCartney to throw scraps that he knows are mediocre out on this new album for a new label. I'm not saying it has to be another "Band on the Run" or even "Chaos and Creation....", but if the album comes off sounding like "Driving Rain" outtakes, it might be a bit off-putting to some. But it sounds like some of the "Hear Music" executives or whoever have listened to this new album; I'm sure a new label would want to hear the new album before releasing it. Or not. Maybe they'll take anything McCartney will give them.

There's that famous story that John and Yoko went with Geffen Records for "Double Fantasy" because Geffen didn't even ask to hear the album before offering to release it.

 

That's more or less where I stand as a fan of Sir Thumbs Aloft.

 

There's no question that he has tons of unreleased material. He also has in the past used relatively "old" tracks on new albums, such as the 1984 track "We Got Married" on 1989's "Flowers in the Dirt", two acoustic tracks recorded in 1992 on 1997's "Flaming Pie", etc. He even finished off the early track "A Love For You" around 30 years later!

It's interesting to see the blurry line between an older recording being an "archival" track that pops up on an archival release of outtakes, and an older recording being presented on a "new" album. Some people don't see the distinction, hence some media describing something like the Beatles' "Live at the BBC" as their "new album", as if it was simply the follow-up to "Let It Be."

 

And I see your point - the big thing I was trying to point out is that EMI won't be able to try to claim in court "You can't give them the rights to this material - we're still in the red from whe they recorded Sgt. Pepper!" Music from the label's perspective is always about return on investment...but when they start violating the deals and fudging the numbers, and get caught...and then violate the resulting settlement... you know - how does the deal hold up? and if it doesn't, then what happens to the fruits of the deal? That's basically Apple's argument, so far as I see it.

But since Apple does have the right to control releases through EMI based on the presence/absence of The Beatles' sanction, and the rumor mill suggests that some form of remasters and digital downloads are pending, I've always been of the impression that neither one of those massive releases/catalog minings will see the light of day until both McCartney's divorce and the EMI lawsuit are resolved.

 

It also depends on whether the older material that's being hauled out for a new album is simply dusted off and proclaimed the master... or if it gets revisited, and dressed up, and reworked.

"Beautiful Night" off Flaming Pie was one that he'd about a decade before it all finally clicked... but the habit goes back further...

While it was never recorded earlier than the Sgt. Pepper sessions, Paul had been kicking around "When I'm Sixty-Four" since writing it in his teens.

But there's so many reasons to leave something in the can and pull it out later for another album - one of them as simple as a particular great song or multiple songs just not fitting the tone of the remainder of the album.

And in the case of abandoning a session and revisiting it later... I dunno. I don't see the problem.

...Even of calling Live at the BBC a "new album" when it came out...was technically true - it was not newly recorded by any means, and for some, it was familiar performances...but that didn't make it any less new to the public. It simply wasn't newly written and recorded...but anyone who tried to imply that would have simply needed a reminder that Mr. Lennon was no longer among the actively recording...

 

I'm playing Air's Pocket Symphony, and I love the sound Nigel Goderich gets. I think it's perfect for Paul now, at his age. I'm disappointed that Nigel isn't doing this next one. I like the mature sound of C&C. Oh well.

 

In the case of things like "Beautiful Night" and "When I'm 64", you've actually brought up another seperate distinction to be made, which is between old *compositions* and old *recordings*. Certainly we see many newly-recorded albums that feature the former, as was the case with something like "Beautiful Night", which was recorded anew for the "Flaming Pie" album. They didn't go back and touch up the 1987 recording (although the '87 version was issued on its own as a b or c-side on one of the many "Flaming Pie" maxi CD singles).

Of course, using old recordings would probably have happened even more than it did if it weren't for changing music styles, recording methods, etc. Something like McCartney issuing a 2007 album with 2001 or 2002 recordings isn't going to be so noticeable. But if he grabbed a recording from "Press to Play" with a bunch of snappy drum machine sounds and DX7's and things like that, it would sound more odd being presented as a "new" recording in 2007.

 

In general, I would tend to agree with your impression. But, I think the "Love" CD and DVD-A were issued well after the recent lawsuit was initiated. So it's certainly possible to keep doing business in the middle of such cases. Of course, it would make more sense for Apple to hold off a whole slate of over a dozen CD releases such as reissuing the entire album catalog if they are worried that EMI is not properly tracking sales and whatnot, as opposed to only one release in the case of "Love", where there would be less possibility of problems. Perhaps. I dunno.

 

I'm heavily leaning toward the likelihood that this new McCartney album was largely recorded in the past.

It will sort of be like "Let It Be" without Spector

No doubt, there will be some flourishes that are newly added. But sessions for Macca tend not to happen without people noticing. If McCartney had been working on an entire album of new material, rumors would be swirling well before a release was announced. I think that is especially true now that he is a media magnet with his divorce taking place. Has anybody been able to place any band members or Kahne with McCartney? You'd notice something like that!

I bet this one's a bit of a rocker...

Looking forward to it!
-mk

 

I hope its a rocker...its high time for the general public to see how good Macca really is...

 

Me too... great album.... thought Chaos was his weakest effort since "Press To Play" when talking complete studio albums.

 

McCartney DOES own his post-Beatles catalogue,and why should he keep it with no-hopers like Capitol,who don't care enough about this catalogue to keep the Wings albums on the market in the U.S.A.?

 

I wouldn't mind if he put out the long-delayed and often cancelled "cold cuts" album of outtakes. But at this point it would probably be a box set - not something Starbucks would want to deal with.

 

From what I remember, Paul and Kahne worked on up to 20-25 tracks for Driving Rain. They liked several of them enough to shelve them enough for a second Kahne-produced CD. Kahne continued to work with Paul, producing the live CD from the Driving Rain tour and the "Vanilla Sky" track. There were indeed additional post-tour recording sessions with Kahne and the band, and if I recall correctly, Rusty or someone else in the band gave some very enthusastic quotes them.

Those sessions ended not in dissatisfaction, but because of a scheduling conflict with (I think) David Kahne; so, Paul, who has certainly dabbled in multi-producer albums before, hooked up with Godrich to try some sessions with him. They did indeed record one song with the band ("Follow Me"), after which Godrich persuaded Paul to record without the band, who had become his security blanket. (e.g., GODRICH: "That one wasn't up to par, Paul." MACCA: "What do you guys think?" BAND (in unison): "Sounds great to us, Paul!")

One interesting thing that may or may not be a factor here is that, after the initial Godrich sessions, Paul took some tracks from BOTH sessions to EMI and was told, "Erm, why don't you persue this solo album with Nigel?" So perhaps Paul, with his contract up and Chaos (in his mind) under-promoted, and with a second Kahne album (which EMI was not wild about) half in the can, decided to test the waters with Starbucks. If the CD does really well, it would embarrass EMI a bit, and they could lure him back to the EMI bosom -- and if that long-term, big bucks reunion with EMI should HAPPEN to take place AFTER his divorce is finalized, well....

 

P.S. -- I loved Chaos and Creation, thought it was one of his best-ever, etc., but I also enjoyed Driving Rain quite a bit. Not as "Beatley", not as classically "McCartney" -- but very strong, very emotional in places (songs like "Lonely Road"), and with a crazed loopiness (the brilliant -- yes, BRILLIANT "Rinse The Raindrops") that we don't get enough of from Paul. So count me among those who are very glad that the so-called "Driving Rain 2" tapes have been dusted off (presumably) and crafted into an album.

 

I thought Paul and/or Nigel said that there were at least two albums worth of material recorded during the Chaos sessions.

So does Paul actually have TWO albums worth of leftover material, one from the Driving sessions, and one from the Chaos sessions?

 

According to what I read (on Macca's own forum, I think) he and Godrich recorded upwards of 30 songs. Sounds like a lot, but once you add all the b-sides to the album tracks, there's only about 10 songs left, and we don't know how good they are, or how finished they are.

If I recall correctly, he had about 1/2 - 2/3 of the "Driving Rain 2" album finished when he dropped it for the Godrich album.