Neil Young:
Archives Vol. 1 (1963-1972)

Andy, well said. I have been on the edge of my seat since last summer waiting for this realease and just recently fell off and on my ass when i saw that two discs i already owned were included. wtf?? I consider Neil a personal icon but I'll be waiting for Volume 2 to be released to see if he gets his shit together - and then doll out 300 bones.

The truth is that if you don't want it, you don't have to buy it.

Also, this review misses the point of this release, why it's revolutionary, etc.

You can download more material from the internet. New stuff appears all the time, y'know those other unreleased tracks, more video content, etc. etc. that you so derisively and in such an incredibly stuck-up way complained about not getting.

In fact, this material will continue to spill out of the internet onto your computer, so you'll always have something new to check out even after you've looked through the exhaustive retrospective on the blu-rays, which I hope was what you were checking out initially.

If you aren't interested in alternate takes and previously unreleased versions of songs, then that's your problem.

Those of us who truly appreciate those things, though - you know, musicians and people who actually care about music in a manner that's not just superficial... well, we're pretty excited.

To call it a scam is absolutely arrogant, and just shows how stuck up and shallow you are. Which is unfortunate.

Also, this idea you imply, that art and music should just be dropped in your lap for free, is disgusting.

So much for supporting the arts!

Matt, I'm not sure where you get the notion that I think art and music should be free. I didn't say that, nor do I believe it. But I think if people drop $200 or $300, they should know what they're getting.

You can only update the Archives material if you buy the $300 Blu-ray edition. And since that material is currently unavailable, it's impossible to review what doesn't exist. For $200 you get the DVD edition, which is what I have, and which consists of mostly previously released material and "video" consisting of a Neil Young album spinning on a turntable. If this is the revolution, then I'd prefer to sleep through it, and I'll stand by what I wrote.

Hilarious. You nailed it. Now face the wrath of the neilbots. Bots, he's not saying art should be free. He's just saying that almost everything on here worth having is already available. The greedy hand indeed.

Andy, the Live at Canterbury House 1968 concert *IS* included. At least, it was included in my copy of the DVD set (I'm listening to it right now). It's labeled as NYA Performance Series Disc 00. I believe it's a bonus that isn't mentioned on the sticker on the box. It was in the separare box that also includes the little notepad and the card you can use to download MP3s of all the songs from the internet (which you didn't mention in your review, btw). A lot of your comments seem valid, BTW. I'm still just digging into the set. Since I never bought those NY studio albums on CD, this set seemed worth it to me. My main criticism so far is just why didn't they make the package a bit more compact? It's pretty poorly designed.

As big of a Neil Young fans as I am. I knew after watching that Archives preview video from a year or two ago that I would not be getting this set. It just looked to me as albums I already have and would only be able to play as DVD or Blu-Ray. Cause everyone knows Blu-Ray car stereos are just around the corner. This was long before they added the CD version. In which I would be repurchising albums I already bought (Fillmore, Canterbury, and Massey Hall). I think the second Archives will be the reall treasurse trove if Neil includes all the rumored material from that time period. Such as the orignal Tonights The Night or even Time Fades Away. But with the wait it took for Archives one ot finally appear. I'm guessing we won't see it for another 10 to 20 years.

can't really trust you judgement when you say there are only 2 vids...more if you look for them. it's a biogaphy y'know

First of all, one can buy the CD version for 69.99. And at 69.99, it's a pretty good deal.

This could have been better than it is. There are a few more unreleased things that could have been on there, and there are a few things left off that were released.

But, for the quality of the remaster alone, one would have to go back and repurchase the first three albums. So, it's not quite the rip off you describe it as.

35 is way too low. Listen to it again. You might still want to give the Blu Ray a low score, but the 69.99 CD set should get at least an 80 (I'd say 90). Remasters and box sets of previously released material are not uncommon. True, it's not the holy grail. But neither is it forgettable.

sounds like andy didn't even listen to it all. just another critic that has no work of his own, no original ideas, and tries to make a living talking about other people. small minded BS. the archives is for the people who want to know more about the artist, from the artist that created the music. to buy the music on CD for the going price at many outlets for only $70............ 8 CD's for $70........ well that is a way better deal than most box sets, and that is the only format anybody else offers. if you want to join the ground breaking edge of the present technology and go blu-ray........ you have options there too, if you want to. no one else has ever offered a product with options like this. sure, it costs more, but already MORE has been added as free downloads that come with the blue-ray purchase, and it won't stop there. i am one of the collectors and extreme fans, and the archives is still a gold mine. cutting edge. nothing like it. ever. a first. and this is just volume 1, and we only got to 1972, what many "non" collectors consider the beginning of neil's career. this is real music, recorded at the time it was made. and a truly awesome offering from the artist. to bad andy doesn't get it. i expected more from a paste writer.

This review really is right on. Considering the length of time Neil waived this under our noses and talked it up -- since 1988 -- it is really lacking. "The Rent is Always Due?" snooze, I've had it for 20 years. "It Might Have Been"? Awesome song...I've had a perfectly good copy of it for 15 years or so. Um, Harvest? Yeah, I have it already.

I used to be a huge Neil fan. I traveled to see him. When he put a new album, I had it in hand by noon the day it came out, without fail. It took a lot, but for many other reasons I won't go in to here, he has thoroughly alienated me over the last 10 years.

The Neilbots don't help. If you want to speak up for him, great. But be rational, for chrissakes. Take the venom out of it and just make your case. It's ok to respectfully disagree with people who are bent out shape with Neil. You distort the issue when you say the don't "care about music" or are "superficial". Has it occurred to you that they "care about music" so much that they have high expectations of this project?

oh, i just noticed andy said this in a previous comment "If this is the revolution, then I'd prefer to sleep through it, and I'll stand by what I wrote." have a nice nap, andy, and maybe during your sleep you can come up with some work of your own.

No doubt this will inflame and aggravate the die hard Neil fans who defend everything his does with relentless perseverence.

Too bad Neil just could not put out his unreleased material in one shot. That would be something interesting and anticipated.

Instead we get an expensive huge ego trip that only the hard cores crave. Why issue cds already purchased. How many times do we have to pay for what we already have? Suppose it fills a void for some who have been waiting for this for ages.

This review is dead-on and if that causes the over-the-tops to take umbrage, well that is just fine. Take as much as you want.

Volume 2 will be out soon looking for you and your wallet.

You all are welcome to take potshots at me, but I can only review what I am given to review. I have ten discs, with no box, no accompanying book, no separate box that includes a notepad and a card I can use to download MP3s, and no disc labeled NYA Performance Series Disc 00 and containing the Live at Canterbury House 1968 concert.

None of these things are there. I didn't mention them in my review because I can't review what I can't see and don't know about.

Aside from that, I'll stand by my comments.

It's called "research," Andy. Give it a shot sometime. All the big magazines do it.

All the info "I can't see and don't know about" is readily available through your friend Google.

And now that you do know all that you should rewrite your review, because without mentioning all those extras it's grossly inaccurate, isn't it?

You're not even reviewing the boxed set... just some discs you were given.

Then why are you writing a review criticizing an incomplete product?

Did you do any research aside from the discs you were given, to make sure that you were actually giving people an accurate review?

You say there are 2 videos, that's absolutely not true - there are many, many more videos than that.

Also, no mention of the endless amount of free stuff you can download from the internet.

No price comparisons between other blu-ray discs (which go for about $25.00 each (That's 250.00 for 10 discs, without even taking into consideration all of the other material you get with the boxed set, including mp3 downloads and ongoing ability to download additional material as it becomes available... no objective deduction that 300 bucks is actually a GOOD DEAL...)

...and make excuses for your many errors by claiming you were "given" an incomplete product, without even bothering to make sure you had the whole boxed set.

Misleading, and filled with false information, this review is.

It's not anybody else's fault that you didn't go to Neil's website and read about everything you get and why it's so innovative.

Paste should take this review down, because it's not even a review of the actual Neil Young Archives!

Dan, I defy you to find a track listing, anywhere on the web, that shows the Canterbury House concert listed as part of the contents of Archives Vol. 1. Go for it. I welcome your findings. But for what it's worth, it's not listed on the official Neil Young Archives web site. It's not listed anywhere in the numerous blog posts that list the tracks on each CD. And yes, I checked them out.

I did plenty of research. And I listened to every track, I read every concert clipping. I checked out all the "Memorabilia," including the fascinating photos of ticket stubs from the Fillmore East. I watched every "video" on every disc, including the 8 discs that featured still photos of Neil Young and scintillating moving picture footage of Neil Young albums spinning on turntables.

This boxed set is a ripoff. That's what I stated in my review, and it's what I'll state again. It consists of mostly previously released music and videos that are no videos at all, and which tax the patience and ability to stay awake of even the most die-hard fan. But those of you who enjoy watching six hours of an album spin on a turntable should certainly take advantage of this fine opportunity.

Andy, you might have said that you were reviewing an advance copy, and thus the retail package might be different. As far as the videos, either you really didn't look around on the disks very much, or the disks they sent you are radically different from the ones in the retail version. Because last night I listened to and browsed the entire "Topanga 3" disk, and there were three videos on that disk alone. Two of them were very interesting. One was live footage of Neil in some club in 1970, and in Washington Square Park in 1970, and one was a CSNY performance. The third wasn't so interesting.
Anyway, that's just one disk, and I was really happy with it. RE: the graphics that play while you listen to the music, I think ALL music DVDs have something like that as a screen saver, and IMO the ones in this set are actually MUCH more interesting than the other ones I've seen (I'm thinking of the Genesis boxed sets which are just static images that NEVER change for the duration of the album). The ones on the Topanga 3 disk were actually a lot of fun to look at. Much like playing an LP, they give you something to space out to while listening. And there's a different one for each track, and they change while the tracks are playing, showing some different photos, and other archival stuff. Mostly they do just serve as screen savers, I think, but IMO they did a nice job of them.

Andy, I think you're thinking these disks are supposed to be DVDs that happen to feature music too, when actually they are music DVDs. It's a specific format, and I think you're reviewing this set as though it's a collection of 10 DVDs rather than 10 music DVDs.

See, this is why Paste Magazine is going under...

...and I, for one, don't want to help.

A lot of people are coming forward to try and validate spending their hard earned cash and that is just fine.

However, it is equally just as rewarding to have someone step up to the plate and help with a big sign that carefully cautions "caveat emptor". Stop trying to beat the guy up for expressing his views.

Perhaps Volume 2 will outshine Volume 1 but it will take about three years to see how the weather is doing.

If these DVD discs are intended primarily as music, then it's very high-priced music that costs roughly three to four times what the music by itself should cost. And it's music most Neil Young fans already own. If they're intended primarily as videos, then prospective buyers should be aware that the vast majority of the playing time will be spent watching records spin on turntables and reel-to-reel tapes spinning round.

I would like to think this might be helpful information for people considering the set. It's not a good introduction to the music of Neil Young because newbies can find more, and better, Neil Young music for far less money. It's disappointing for longtime fans because so much of what is here is already readily available, and because the video component of the set is so disappointing.

If you don't like those views, fine. You're welcome to your opinion.

IMO, the best way for people to think of this set is to think of it like the recent Genesis boxed sets, if those sets didn't include the CDs, but only the DVDs. Those sets probably included about as much unreleased video as this set includes unreleased audio. And this set has a bunch of videos to boot.

I need to watch the rest of Neil Young Archives Vol. I so I can comment more accurately, but the main point is that the DVDs that come with this set should be though of as similar to the DVDs that come with the Genesis boxes - they're primarily there so you can have the music in DVD audio format, but there are a lot of extras too, and better graphics while you listen to the DVD-audio music.

As far as price - yes, it could have been priced lower. But the book is big and quite interesting (and bound in real simulated-leather!).

Andy wrote:
"If these DVD discs are intended primarily as music, then it's very high-priced music that costs roughly three to four times what the music by itself should cost."

As far as the DVD version goes, the disks come to about $16.00 each. You're saying that DVD audio disks should sell for $4 or $5 each? That'd be nice, but it's a lot to ask.

Andy also wrote:
"If they're intended primarily as videos, then prospective buyers should be aware that the vast majority of the playing time will be spent watching records spin on turntables and reel-to-reel tapes spinning round."

They're not intended primarily as videos. I feel like you sort of missed this whole DVD audio thing. Here's the description of the format from Wikipedia:

"DVD-Audio (commonly abbreviated as DVD-A) is a digital format for delivering very high-fidelity audio content on a DVD. DVD-Audio is not intended to be a video delivery format and should not be confused with video DVDs containing concerts and music videos."

I can see the gist of the argument here and it is a valid one. If I had everything of Neil's, I doubt I'd buy it. As it stands, I don't have anything but the DVD - 'Heart of Gold' and an old CD of 'Harvest', so I'm thinking of buying it. I'm neither a rabid NY fan, or a newbie. I REMEMBER when 'Heart of Gold' was first played on the radio and bought 'Harvest' on vinyl shortly after. Years later I bought 'Rust Never Sleeps', saw the corresponding movie in the local theater and even bought the songbook. I became a dedicated, if short-term fan and bought 'Live Rust', 'Hawks & Doves', 'Re-ac-tor' and 'Trans' as soon as they were released. After that, I lost track of Neil and sold my vinyl - losing all thing NY in the process.

Forward to 2005 - I saw 'Prairie Wind' at the library, played it and was interested enough to get hold of the DVD, 'Heart of Gold', which is much better, IMO. I've since listened to 'Live At Massey Hall' and 'Chrome Dreams II', again thanks to the library, and found 'Freedom' and 'Decade' on vinyl in a thrift shop.

I don't have any of the older stuff (except 'Harvest'), so this looks like a pretty good buy on CD.

Hate to break it to you Andy, but Live at Canterbury House is in fact a bonus cd & dvd set included with the DVD and Blu-ray Archive sets. It was a secret. It was a surprise. That's why it's not on the web. That's why it's not listed in the track lists.

Open up the black storage box in Archives box and oh look, there it is.

I now have two copies, so if you want one I'll be selling it shortly.

Ah, an unadvertised, unlisted CD/DVD in a box I don't have. I see. Thanks for the info.

Just to clarify, LiveMusicisBetter, Live at Canterbury is presented as a CD & DVD-A set in the Archives (as opposed to CD & DVD). Very minimal graphics on the DVD-A, but it sounds great.

Andy wrote:

"Ah, an unadvertised, unlisted CD/DVD in a box I don't have. I see. Thanks for the info."

That's CD/DVD-A!!!

And isn't it fairly common for critics to receive review copies that are somewhat different from the final version? Obviously if you didn't even have the box, it shouldn't be so surprising that some other elements aren't present.

You're seemingly refusing to address the fact that as a number of people have said, there is a cd version available for $70.

As for the amount of unreleased material well it based on what I've read elsewhere it sounds like there isn't much more available.

I receive many boxed sets that are "out of the box." Other than the lack of a box and accompanying book(let), I think it's reasonable to assume that the contents (music, and videos, if applicable) are the same as that "in the box," that people actually purchase. In this case, it appears that they weren't. And so, in this case, it appears that I made a comment in my review about a missing concert that is, in fact, a part of the box (apparently built in to the box that I don't have), and unadvertised and unlisted so it can be a "surprise."

Oh well. It is certainly true that I am not clairvoyant.

Since this concert has also been previously released, it doesn't change the tenor of my review. It's more previously released music without good (or, in this case, any) video content. But the line about "Where's the Canterbury House concert?" should go away. It's apparently there after all.

You want only worshipful write ups of aging baby boomers, then read Rolling Stone. Regardless of the inclusion of a few more videos or the Cantebury House concert, Andy's review is the best I've read about this NY box set. It is such a rip off for artists to release a huge box set mixing massive amounts of previously released material with a minimal amount of new stuff. Dylan sort of did this with the othwerwise excellent Biograph, but the unreleased and released parts were pretty evenly matched. The subsequent Bootleg Series is a model of how to handle unreleased material. Beatles Anthology did it well too. I wish Neil had followed their example. Videos? Pictures? Blue Ray? Who cares - I want music. And when I buy a CD or DVD, I'd like to get a finished product and not have to register on-line and download more stuff. He's had years to put this together - there's no excuse. I want to put the disc in my stereo and listen. Not sit at my computer and gaze. Otherwise, just put the whole thing on itunes and send out a nice picture book with a itunes gift card in it... Come to think of it, maybe the new tracks are on itunes so I can just download those... If its not there, then Neil's only accidentally encouraging illegal torrent downloading. Which people unfortunately will do to avoid paying for this rip off.

JC! wrote:

"Regardless of the inclusion of a few more videos or the Cantebury House concert..."

It seems to be a lot of videos, not just a few.

"I want to put the disc in my stereo and listen. Not sit at my computer and gaze."

Putting these disks in your stereo and listening is the main purpose of this set - I doubt you'd be able to appreciate the DVD-A sound from your computer speakers, although I guess it's possible.

Whitman, I don't have a beef with you, and as I said before, you've made some valid criticisms. I'm just trying to drive home that NONE of the material on this set has been made available with DVD-A sound before. Going back to the Genesis sets, those sets included entire studio albums that had already been released in remastered editions, but they appeared in those boxes for the first time in 5.1 mixes. For some people, improved sound will be enough to buy the Neil Young Archives Vol. 1. For some that won't be enough of a reason. But that and the unreleased material would be the main reason for buying it. The video material seems pretty good, IMO, but that and the screen savers alone wouldn't make me buy it either.

You screwed up, your review is factually inaccurate (I don't care about your opinion) and you won't admit it.

And this is a defense? For a professional writer? Really?

"I think it's reasonable to assume that the contents... "

But no, you're right and the rest of the world is wrong....no matter how many ways it's pointed out that you screwed up.

Look, Dan, there is one factual error in my review. I said that the box didn't include the Canterbury concert, and apparently it did.

And I've already said that. What else do you want me to say? I also said that I'm not clairvoyant, because I'm not. If a disc is unlisted, unadvertised, and available only if you have the physical box, and if one doesn't have the physical box, then guess what? One won't know about that disc. You can moan about "research" all you want, but "research" would have, and did, reveal absolutely nothing about the existence of that disc. Because I don't have it, and there's nothing in the marketing literature that says it exists.

Does any of this change my opinion of this boxed set? No. I would advise people not to buy it. Deal with it.

Brock, that's fair enough, and I agree that the enhanced sound is a reason to buy the set for some people. I tried to address that in my "24-bit/192 kHz stereo PCM audiophile quality" comment in the review.

I find the recently released Genesis boxed sets vastly superior to Neil's, mainly because there are 13+ hours of video content in each one, but sure, audiophiles do buy these things because of the promise of better sound.

Come on Andy, this is a hack job at best, your review lacks what all good journalism should namely balance. Is the set and concept flawed? probably... Is it worth the money in these recessionary times? Depends how much of a fan of Neil's art you are. Is there great material fans don't have currently?... Absolutely. You failed to mention that the DVD and CD version's are compromises of the Blu-Ray version... Neil makes that plainly clear on his site if you want the full experience then you need the blu-ray. Before anyone complains about forced to buy new hardware, no-one is. Is it a rip off? Well it took me 3 hours to go through and see all the content on just 1 disc, is that value for money? YMMV. Once you have seen everything on the disc's there is a function just to play all the tracks in sequence just like you would any other audio disc, you can do this without the need for a monitor as it is the default setting on boot up. What leads me to believe you have an agenda is you cleary didn't spend anytime with the set, if you had... Then tell us how the CSNY video of On the Way Home from Fillmore was like, or how good was the Springfield doing Mr Soul on TV? What about the footage of Neil doing The loner solo acoustic, any good? What about the alternative mixes and versions of released material on the box, what was that like? Did you thing the version of Everybody knows this is nowhere sounded like a Springfield outtake? I did, totally different to the Crazy Horse version. What about those CSNY live versions of Tell me Why and Only love can break your heart, Worth it for fans? I think so. What about the holy grails of the Stray Gator versions of Bad Fog and Journey through the past? Understandable you missed the Canterbury set but was your set missing the unreleased Riverboat set as well because you seemed to have missed that as well in your review? Also you seem to have mistaken screensaver's for video content.
I look at this set in a similar way to the Buffalo Springfield set, it was flawed and had some baffling repetition of content but those concerns went the minute I heard Still's solo demo of 4 Day Gone... The same goes for Archives, it's not an out-takes set, it's the first volume of an audio-visual document and overview of an artist's life's work, it's ego driven and it's expensive but there is weeks worth of material to watch view listen and discover, and when you have you can play the discs like any audio CD... just hook you BR player to the analog inputs of your amp and your set. Ohh and Andy you forgot there is mp3 downloads of all songs in the DVD and blu-ray set and the content for blu-ray is continuely updated with new content for free as it is discovered.

I'm disappointed there's such a lack of studio outtakes (that I don't already have). There's still more from After the Gold Rush sessions: "Big Waves", "I Need Her Love to Get By", "Sea of Madness" (not the CSNY version) plus "Everybody Knows..." (from the s/t album sessions), "See the Sky About to Rain" (Harvest sessions) just from what I've read. Here's hoping the Homegrown sessions make it out on Vol. 2...

"Cough up the goods, Shaky!"

Andy, after spending a couple of hours with disk 1 last night and getting through only about half of it, I really am wondering just how much time you really spent going through the disks in the set (not the live disks). Disk 1 is mostly Buffalo Springfield stuff. To find most of the good content, you have to go to the track listing (the big file drawer) and click on the tab for each track. You have to do a little navigating, but for each track there's a pretty good amount of interesting stuff. Video, excerpts from interviews with Neil (very interesting bits about the individual songs, etc.), photos, other documents (one of my favorites is a letter to Neil's mother letting her know some paperwork will be arriving that she needs to sign, for Neil's BMI contract. It ends with "You should be very proud of your son. Not only is he very talented, but he's a young gentleman." Come on, how sweet is that?)

Anyway, it's taking me a while to realize the scope and depth of this set, and anyone who's at first underwhelmed by the contents needs to take a closer browse through those track by track listings - that's where most of the content is.

Yes the Neilbots are out in full venomous force. If Andy, a reviewer, wasn't given a disc to review, doesn't that speak to the ineptitude of Neil's team?
Andy, no need to be so defensive. Your review is right on. Let it be.
I love the comments about how this $300 set is disappointing, but the NEXT $300 set better have more unreleased stuff(petulently stomps foot). And if it doesn't? Well then the NEXT $300 set better be really good. Or the NEXT $300 set. Or the NEXT one. $1500 plus device plus performance series? There's a sucker born every minute

I think you did a fine job Andy. I own probably 40 NY recordings and I appreciate not duplicating my collection. I would however like to see some of the material but not for $200. I also enjoyed you getting your balls busted but it was all in fun and I will continue to respect your reviews.

I generally enjoy reading reviews from both the Pro and Con sides of the coin, but whoever this reviewer is just presents a heavily slanted opinion that is riddled with factual errors and attempts to slag what is generally hailed as a welcome and adventurous release.

A question comes to mind as to whether this writer actually reviewed the archives or simply read other reviews and formed opinions based on internet chatter somewhere.

I don't think that I'll be returning to Paste for any future music reviews by Andy Whitman.

While I am not the furthest one could be from the 'Neilbot' label, I certainly don't arbitrarily defend his entire catalog or every career move.

However, it does seem that Andy Whitman has missed the point of this release. As I understand it, the primary intended media for this release is blu-ray and its superior high-def audio format, the first format that apparently gets in the same ballpark as analog vinyl. The DVD and CD versions are available for those who don't own blu-ray players, but are NOT the primary intended media for these re-masters. Blu-ray is a viable new a/v media format in its infancy and as a bleeding edge adopter, NY will face the same criticism that artists faced initially when they re-released material on 8-track, cassette tape, and compact disc. But for audiophiles interested in that level of quality, the blu-ray version will deliver, and will be worth the cost (a cost that, as previous posters have pointed out, is actually not that exorbitant) to upgrade their library. Whitman’s glossing over of this entire subject with a single "24-bit/192 kHz stereo PCM audiophile quality" comment implies a disconnect with the original intent of this release and frankly, is not very forward-thinking.

Secondly, it is unfortunate that Whitman is enforcing the stereotype of the disgruntled, arrogant music reviewer by telling us posters to “deal with it” in regards to his inaccurate, incomplete, and, if previous posts are accurate, sloppy review. Several posters have commented on a wealth of material available on specific discs…content that required some attentive digging and an interest in exploring all the content of the discs – something I would expect a reviewer to do. Instead, it appears that Whitman stuck the disc in his player, hit play, and turned his attention to writing bitter, inadequate defenses of his reviews online, while occasionally looking over at his TV screen and mistaking the spinning record screen saver for the accompanying video content. Whitman, you come off as a lazy, incompetent writer, out of touch with new technology, and do nothing to correct that impression with your additional defensive, arrogant comments.

I will without hesitation concede that it is an oversight on NY’s part to skip releasing a version of Archives that only includes material not previously released. Dedicated fans that have already purchased the previous official releases that do not want a blu-ray experience but do want access to these alternate versions and unreleased tracks should not be forced to re-buy material in the same format they already own.

As a Paste subscriber who recently made a contribution to “Save Paste!” I am disappointed with Whitman’s review and his comments justifying an inaccurate review, not because I disagree with him, but because of his apparently sloppy, lazy, and incomplete review of this release. This is not the sort of journalism I wanted to “save.” Perhaps I made a mistake in contributing to the delay of Paste’s unavoidable demise? See, Whitman? It’s that easy to admit that you’ve had a lapse in judgment. Try it sometime.

Ithink it's been well and truely established that this review is incomplete and factualy incorrect and does any right minded music fan and injustice. Paste, do the right thing and remove.

Some people are being a little harsh on Andy, but one thing that really needs to be made clear is that this statement from his review is utterly incorrect:

"There are two true videos here: a grainy but excellent version of Neil’s 1971 solo concert at Toronto’s Massey Hall, and a re-released version of Neil’s interminable, ponderously stoned 1973 movie Journey Through the Past."

There are numerous other videos.

Andy wrote:

"I find the recently released Genesis boxed sets vastly superior to Neil's, mainly because there are 13+ hours of video content in each one, but sure, audiophiles do buy these things because of the promise of better sound."

13+ hours? Really? I'll have to check that, but I don't recall it being near that much. But there is a lot, that's for sure, and a lot of it is very good. Even though some people complained most of it was already "out there" for the taking, I'm glad to have it all in one place.

If you didn't review the actual box why did you run a photo of the actual box? Seems like false advertising.

What are we reviewing here? The bottom line or the music? Andy's review may lead Paste to rethink rating systems again. 35? I guess we can expect more of the same when Andy reviews the Beatles remasters (with a mono only box set no less, the nerve!!). "a scam" "save yourself a lot of money"

An artist isn't permitted to update and remaster their art? Maybe Neil should have followed the Radiohead model and given out 160kbs mp3s that sound great.

Let's look at this box set for what it is: a musical time line presented in awesome audio quality (blu ray people, blu ray) in an age where audio quality falls upon deaf ears. Yes, it is redundant with past live releases but a 35 this isn't.

I know what my budget is, thank you. There is a format for everyone.

what's a neilbot? is that supposed to hurt someone who bought the archives.... if they are happy to have the archives? are you trying to insult one who likes neil young's music and offering? should i now cry if i qualify as one of the above? should i hate an artist if i go to a concert and they play 25 songs in 2 to 3 hours, but don't play my favorite song of theirs? am i a neilbot? i don't get it.

gotta say you missed the boat on this one...

For a little background, not even remotely a neilbot (to echo other posters, what exactly is that?!?!?) However, I have been quite impressed with his prolific career & participation in multiple supergroups. Not to mention his obvious influence on modern groups such as Pearl Jam, My Morning Jacket and Dave Matthews Band. I saw this as honestly a good way to get to know the man & his career. Other than a vinyl copy of Harvest & iTunes d/l of greatest hits & Mirror Ball (gotta say I supported Pearl Jam & Brendan O'Brien's association here more than actually Neil..) I do not have any other piece of his catalog prior to this purchase.

Blu-Ray as Neil states is the wave of the future in box sets. Between the absolutely phenomenal audio (which when compared to vinyl, IS quite impressive & it puts mp3's to shame...) & functionality of menus, etc it is a music fans dream come true. Imagine sets in the future for Dylan & the Beatles...we can only hope they and their historians are as excited about their projects as Mr. Young was with the Archives. This was definitely a labor of love & not just a money-making

Is the set pricey? Most definitely, but as mom says, "sometimes the cheapest option, isn't the best option." I echo Neil's sentiment that Blu-ray is the wave of the future & "the way to go..." The quality of the materials including a phenomenal collective pseudo-leather book is difficult to describe...you just have to open it and leaf through it while enjoying the music. We have become a society of productless music, one where you hit the enter button, listen to substandard audio quality & do not have the liner notes or album art/pictures to look at while listening to the album...this is not the case with the Archives as you are truly immersed in all things young Neil Young, the Squires, Buffalo Springfield, Neil Young solo, Neil Young w/ Crazy Horse & CSNY. I cannot emphasize enough how this is truly an experience & not just throwing the music on as background noise...

There will be the capability to d/l future tracks, videos etc that are discovered...& just further proof of Mr. Young's disdain for the mp3, they are offering d/l of all of the songs on the set, included with the purchase of the original boxset. I cannot recommend this set more wholeheartedly to music fans. It is the way to not only appreciate the audio but is a truly interactive experience. Even if you don't like Mr. Young's musical output, you have to cheer for the success of the Archives in hopes that your favorite band will one day be able to release such a plethora of unreleased & special items.

Sure there have been hiccups, & delays...I still do not have the mp3 copies of the songs which have been "delayed" in their release. However, if I was that interested in the mp3's I would have bout the CD copies to rip, d/l'ed from iTunes, or gone the illegal d/l rout.

C'mon a 35 rating...that's almost laughable. Not only is the musical output presented her outstanding, but I think you minimize the actual audio quality and the depth of video included. I can't see how you can't praise his diligence & embracing a new technology. I recommend you revisit this product...oh & by the way, contrary to your review & just as an added bonus Live at Canterbury CD/DVD IS included in the box set as an added little bonus!

I am so enjoying reading Andy digging himself further and further into a hole.

He gets an incomplete product, reviews it as-is, then claims he did a bunch of research.

So if he did so much research (and supposedly found all the other stuff he claims isn't in the boxed set that is), why didn't he indicate that in his review?

Had any actual research been done, this review would have come with disclaimers about it being a partial review of part of the boxed set.

But that would invalidate the review, wouldn't it?

There's a rule of thumb that most magazine article writers generally seem to follow - and that is that you shouldn't go down in the comments section and defend yourself against your detractors, regardless of how you feel about it.

It just makes you look worse and worse, and the hole gets deeper and deeper. Particularly when you've been proven wrong by your detractors, it really is pretty silly to cry innocent about it and make up excuses for your lack of journalistic integrity.

I'm torn about this release. I've been a NY fan for "decades" and have been waiting decades for these archives to be released. The mere fact that they're finally here is kind of amazing. That alone is newsworthy.

Neil Young is famously obsessive about, well, everything, but especially sound quality. I remember an essay he wrote for Guitar Player magazine in the early 90's dissing digital sound and lamenting the loss of the Analog LP format. So I believe the above folks are right when they state that the Blu-Ray format is the main reason for releasing the previously-released stuff again. Apparently if you have the right equipment the stuff sounds amazing.
I think part of the fun of this set is hunting for Easter Eggs. Apparently there is even footage of video of Neil confronting a record store clerk who is selling bootleg LPs. You have to click on an amp or something to find it.

I do wish that there was a way to get the unreleased stuff on its own. But I don't believe the founder of the Bridge School is out to money-grub or to swindle anyone. He's an artist with extraordinary perfectionist tendencies who has always done things his way, and archives vol. 1 is no exception.

After studying a few of the disks, it's pretty plain that the reason the previously released material is there is that this is an electronic Neil Young "museum," and it wouldn't make sense to leave out his whole body of work. It's not a release that's about new, unreleased music, it's a release that takes his full body of work (from a certain era) and puts it in context with a lot of multi-media archival material.

If Blueray is the future of music, as some contend on this blogg, then, at 30 bucks a pop, I think I'll opt out.

As much as I like vinyl, I do not believe it is the gold standard of audio quality. I like it mostly for the packaging. For all the positive arguments about vinyl, I have heard very few vinyl records that are perfect. One thing I never hear much about among vinyl audiophiles is inner groove distortion. It is present in virtually any turntable set-up out there.

I'm also uncomfortable with the blanket comdemnation by many vinyl audiophiles in regard to CDs and other digital music forms. Digital may not be perfect, but I consider myself fortunate to have lived to see the day. I'll never forget listening to 'Murmur' on CD for the first time. Clarity and space. And it was remastered in 1990! (these early discs were the ones NY was complaining about at the time). If anything, I have a complaint about some modern CDs - the remastering sounds distorted on the low end - some say fuller, I say louder.

Which is my point, for all the numbers the audiophiles spit out, this stuff is mostly subjective. One man's cloud is another man's cover. I believe the trend to blue-ray is for one purpose alone - to get us to shell-out the bucks AGAIN for the same record we bought 5 or 6 times before.

What a half-assed review. I popped in only a fraction of the Blu-ray discs and found loads of interesting video footage... Neil with an orchestra, Neil in a record store, making the worker so nervous about the bootleg he wanted to "steal". Neil chatting on his ranch. It goes on and on. I don't think you watched the content correctly. Yes, you can watch a spinning record or tape deck if you want to - but if you select the songs from the file cabinet instead, you get all sorts of goodies. Bad "review", my friend. Also, the Blu-ray audio quality is AMAZING. "Old Man" sounded so great, I closed my eyes and it felt like Neil and friends were a couple feet in front of me. Obviously, you'll need a system that can handle the hi-rez stuff. If you love Neil, you need this Blu-ray set.

Hmmm. Some much better, more factually accurate and objective reviews in the comments section.

Everyone, skip the article and come down to the comments if you want real, accurate information!