response 15 of 44:

Sep 26 23:29 UTC 2002

  In the Beatles' case, however, the superiority of the British releases
  was so clear-cut that I find it difficult to imagine anyone ever arguing
  objectively in favor of the US LPs.  That's not necessarily the case
  with the Stones' work.

  Again I'd like to cite the wonderful re-issue work done by the German(?)
  label Castle on the Kinks' catalog, another band whose British-invasion
  era recordings were scrambled a bit in the trip across the Atlantic.
  But when Castle re-issued their masterpiece "The Kinks are the Village
  Green Preservation Society" they included not only the original 15-track
  mono version but a 12-track stereo album with a different track ordering
  plus two songs not found on the original, plus a mono single version of
  one of the new tracks from the stereo album..  

  It'd be great if something similar had been done with the Stones'
  "Aftermath" -- start from the UK version, add the "Paint it Black" single
  which was present on the US version and absent in the UK, then add as
  many of the alternate mixes released on the US version as space allowed.
  Instead they'd rather sock the consumer for two full-priced CDs of
  newly-remastered but 40-year-old material from their back catalog.
  Figure that anyone who's likely to buy both US and UK version probably
  already owns the existing CD release of "Aftermath" and clearly it's
  all about milking the hardcore fans for all they're willing to pay.
  I don't find that very endearing..