jmorris
New member
Anyone bought them? Don't waste your money,they suck.I mean really suck. I was very excited to here what todays technology and mastering engineers could do. Answer......fuck it up!
tc4b
Yeah I been drinkin, SO!?
Anyone bought them? Don't waste your money,they suck.I mean really suck. I was very excited to here what todays technology and mastering engineers could do. Answer......fuck it up!
Could you be more specific? Not being a smartass, I'm really curious. ARe you talking about the stereo mixes, the mono, or both?
Seafroggys
Well-known member
They sound better than the 87 CD's. Enough to warrant rebuying all of them? Probably not, although I am getting my favorites though.
They sound better than the MSFL LP's as well. Do they sound as good as the original Parlophone LP's? Never heard those, so I dunno.
But they sound great.
They sound better than the MSFL LP's as well. Do they sound as good as the original Parlophone LP's? Never heard those, so I dunno.
But they sound great.
W
woundedknee
New member
I remember thinking the same thing when Pet Sounds came out as a double disc (one disc re, other original). I bought it to compare the remasters with the originals and was sorely dissapointed that I spent the extra dough, should have just stayed with the original.
jmorris
New member
I bought Abbey Raod and Sgt Pepper. They suck. Guitars tones lost, low end on some tunes is now boomy....like some kid did it in his bedroom. Some drums lost......awful...Makes me think it all about money for them!
C
Chibi Nappa
New member
Don't know what you guys are listening to. My only complaint for the stereo is some brickwalling. But they held back way more than I expected them to. But Pepper through Let it Be (the only stereo I've heard) sound awesome.
The mono set is fan-freakin'-tastic. Nothing altered. Pristine transfer.
The mono set is fan-freakin'-tastic. Nothing altered. Pristine transfer.
Seafroggys
Well-known member
Some guys in this thread are high. Seriously, drums disappearing? You can actually HEAR the drums in these transfers. Boomy bass? Hell yeah! Though had I mastered it I probably would have put a teeny bit less bass than they did, but its still great. Come Together is really ballin'!
jmorris
New member
We are not high, just have better ears than you...
T
Tim Gillett
Banned
Let me get this straight. Abbey Road Studios, one of the premier recording and remastering studios in the world, directs their best personnel to remaster the whole Beatles catalog, and they take years to do it.
Problem is the staff cant hear to save themselves. They have no idea what they are doing.
Perhaps they shouldve employed jmorris to do it for them.
D
dodgeaspen
New member
Have not had the chance to hear them yet, but I have read mixed feelings. I understand on the stereo mix people were outraged because the vocals were on one side and the band was on the other. I guess people wanted George Martin to re do everything. Well folks, that's the way stereo was back then. Personally I love it that way. I think it has the best separation. Someone posted something about Pet Sounds original and remastered? Has anyone checked it out in 5.1 DTS??? WOW. awesome job on that one.
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
No that's NOT how stereo was back then. That's pretty much specific to the Beatles and the American releases. The original Parlophone releases in Britain were mono. I'm a vinyl collector and I actually have a set of the Parlophone albums. Mono is definitely the best mix on those first albums because that was the only real mix done by the boys and George Martin. And yes, I also have the inferior American 'stereo' pressings.
When the albums were released in the states ... the record companies insisted that it had to be stereo for the American market so they did an "electronically reprocessed" stereo which wasn't real stereo at all but simply took some stuff and stuck it in one speaker and the rest in the other. But it wasn't an actual mix. They just got some copies of the 2 track masters which were that way but always intended to end up mono. That's why they ended up with all vocals but one on one side and all instruments except one (usually) on the other side. It was intended to allow the limited 2 track recordings to have a further bit of mixing before it turned into the final mono mix, e.g., they could tweak vocal levels for instance. It was crude multi-tracking except they only had 2 tracks.
Though they sounds normal to me since I grew up listening to them that way ....... it was hardly the best mix and anyone from Britain that had grown up with the intended mixes finds them to be laughable.
D
dodgeaspen
New member
Thanks for the post Lt. Bob. I was referring to the American mixes. Sorry I didn't make that clear.
Seafroggys
Well-known member
Lt. Bob is actually incorrect.
The Beatles were present for the Mono mixes. At the time it was considered the primary market. That's why nowadays fanatics vie for the mono releases because they were as The Beatles wanted them.
The engineers also cut their own stereo mixes based on the mono mixes but obviously tweaked. Since the tapes were only 4 track for many years, the only way to get the "true" stereo effect was to pan the 4 tracks everywhich, which is why you have nothing centered. To be honest, this is weird in headphones but sounds fine on speakers.
By the time of the White Album, stereo was obviously much bigger, so the main mix was done in stereo, and the mono version was just a summing of the stereo mix. For Let it Be and Abbey Road, it was purely stereo. You also had 8 track for those last albums as well, which offered much better mixes (centered vocals and such).
Mono WAS bigger in Britain than the US. No dispute there. But Capitol did not do their own mixes. Their own masters, sure, but they used the same mixes that were in England. The mono and stereo masters used for the 2009 remasters are the same as they've always been (although I did read somewhere that the 1987 Rubber Soul CD was remixed, correct me if I'm wrong).
Now, it would have been nice to have a remix. The 1999 Yellow Submarine remix sounds FANTASTIC! They did a great job there. But they did not do that, but what they did do sounds great. No fault on their part, as the mixing had already been done.
As for the sound quality of the 2009....sure, as I said before, its not worth me rebuying all their CD's (they sound great on my studio monitors anyway) but the 2009 CD's do sound better than the 1987 CD's. They even sound better than the 1981 MSFL LP's, which lack mids (damn scooped mids EQ). As I said, I do not know how the original Parlophone prints sounded, but apparently those were the best, and I can't compare them.
In every conceivable way, the 2009 remasters were an improvement over anything released in the past 30 years. A remix would have been even better, but I am not complaining.
The Beatles were present for the Mono mixes. At the time it was considered the primary market. That's why nowadays fanatics vie for the mono releases because they were as The Beatles wanted them.
The engineers also cut their own stereo mixes based on the mono mixes but obviously tweaked. Since the tapes were only 4 track for many years, the only way to get the "true" stereo effect was to pan the 4 tracks everywhich, which is why you have nothing centered. To be honest, this is weird in headphones but sounds fine on speakers.
By the time of the White Album, stereo was obviously much bigger, so the main mix was done in stereo, and the mono version was just a summing of the stereo mix. For Let it Be and Abbey Road, it was purely stereo. You also had 8 track for those last albums as well, which offered much better mixes (centered vocals and such).
Mono WAS bigger in Britain than the US. No dispute there. But Capitol did not do their own mixes. Their own masters, sure, but they used the same mixes that were in England. The mono and stereo masters used for the 2009 remasters are the same as they've always been (although I did read somewhere that the 1987 Rubber Soul CD was remixed, correct me if I'm wrong).
Now, it would have been nice to have a remix. The 1999 Yellow Submarine remix sounds FANTASTIC! They did a great job there. But they did not do that, but what they did do sounds great. No fault on their part, as the mixing had already been done.
As for the sound quality of the 2009....sure, as I said before, its not worth me rebuying all their CD's (they sound great on my studio monitors anyway) but the 2009 CD's do sound better than the 1987 CD's. They even sound better than the 1981 MSFL LP's, which lack mids (damn scooped mids EQ). As I said, I do not know how the original Parlophone prints sounded, but apparently those were the best, and I can't compare them.
In every conceivable way, the 2009 remasters were an improvement over anything released in the past 30 years. A remix would have been even better, but I am not complaining.
Waltz Mastering
New member
Mixing for the stereo mixes was not given the attention of mono mixes because very few people had stereo back in the day, but they were mixed from the source multi-tracks, not 2 track tapes as mentioned.
From RTB:
Most of the hard panning for the stereo mixes of the Beatles was due to the pre-configured panning of the four track tape returns on the Redd console.
From 1966 and before when Norm Smith engineered, tracks 1 and 2 from the 4 track were returned to the Redd console channels 1 and 2. These channels had no pan pots on them and were fixed hard left and hard right.
Track 1 of the 4 track usually consisted of drums, bass and r.guitar (hard left).
Track 2 usually had guitar, piano and percussion (hard right).
Tracks 3 and 4 usually contained Vocal and solo's + misc. and returned to the Redd console, on channels 7 and 8 which were primarily kept panned to the center.
After 66 when Emerick engineer, he experimented a bit more with different track layout and configurations but kept somewhat consistent with the hard panning configurations that Smith used up until the 8 tracks and solid state consoles were used.
T
Tim Gillett
Banned
My understanding is the early Beatles stuff was tracked to 2 track stereo machines as a primitive multitrack, with instruments on one track and vocals the other. This was because they didnt have any recorders with more than 2 tracks.
In that sense I think Lt Bob is correct.
We used to speak of "Beatles stereo" with the hard panning but this was (and still is) due to the fact that 2 tracks is all there is on the early session tapes. Wiki says for some of the early tracks like Love Me Do, even the mono mixdown master has been lost. Since the 1980's EMI have used a collector's good condition mono 45rpm as their best source.
Sure, as time went on EMI acquired 4 track machines and finally 8 track for the last albums. That's my understanding anyway.
In that sense I think Lt Bob is correct.
We used to speak of "Beatles stereo" with the hard panning but this was (and still is) due to the fact that 2 tracks is all there is on the early session tapes. Wiki says for some of the early tracks like Love Me Do, even the mono mixdown master has been lost. Since the 1980's EMI have used a collector's good condition mono 45rpm as their best source.
Sure, as time went on EMI acquired 4 track machines and finally 8 track for the last albums. That's my understanding anyway.
VSpaceBoy
..loading
Well I have to disagree with the OP, I think they sound fantastic. I would recommend them to anyone. I can tell you though that I'm not a die hard type fan so I don't need to hear it mono, or any certain way. I just know that I like how it sounds more than any other version.
I haven't stopped listening to them since I got them. I hear things now that I didn't before. I had the White Album playing when some ppl came over for dinner and they (without me telling them what it was) commented on how good it sounded.
I haven't stopped listening to them since I got them. I hear things now that I didn't before. I had the White Album playing when some ppl came over for dinner and they (without me telling them what it was) commented on how good it sounded.
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
that's the way I remember it as well. They didn't get any 4 track machines for Beatles recording until around Rubber Soul. Prior to that album , they recorded to 2 track machines.
Even Sgt Peppers was only done on 4 track machines (possibly 2 of them synced)
C
Chibi Nappa
New member
To clear up any confusion here, for the 2009 release they used the 1987 stereo mixes for any album that did not have a "real" stereo mix in the 60's. They put the original 60's mono and "fake" stereo mixes on the 2009 mono box only.
I have not heard the new masters from the 1987 mixes, so I can't comment on those. But the 2009 stereo masteres for Pepper and later sound killer and the 2009 mono box is flawless.
I have not heard the new masters from the 1987 mixes, so I can't comment on those. But the 2009 stereo masteres for Pepper and later sound killer and the 2009 mono box is flawless.
Seafroggys
Well-known member
Clarification, they only had 2 track for their first two albums (Please Please Me and With the Beatles). I Want to Hold Your Hand was the first song recorded with a 4 track deck (in 1963 sometime). They used 4 track for nearly everything they did. They used an 8 track at Trident Studios, where they recorded Hey Jude and a few other songs, they also had one at Apple Studios for the Get Back/Let it Be album, but the Abbey Road studio didn't get one until 1969, which they used for the album Abbey Road.
So they did have multi-tracks for all but their first 30 or so songs, when it was vocals on one channel and instruments on another.
So they did have multi-tracks for all but their first 30 or so songs, when it was vocals on one channel and instruments on another.
jmorris
New member
Top end studio does not mean top end results.The "new masters" of the Beatles suck in my opinion.Yhet are different.Different does not mean "better". The Let It Be naked remixes are also IMO bad. I have listened to Beatles music since I was 12 years old.Iam now 50.I have a pretty good refference point I believe. I heard a difference within the first 2 seconds of "Come Together" . I did not say Abbey Road should hire me....Tim......,I said some of you need better ears if you cant hear the difference.The difference to me is not a good difference. Way too boomy.Not more bass mind you boomy,unpleasant boomy. Some guitars are lost compaired to org. versions.Mixes sound altered due to eq.changes I assume. Drums on some tune lack balls and punch.Yes, they are louder but who cares.Louder does not mean better or more punchy.