Beatles remasters are here!

[Sid Hartha]

I mean, "I am the Walrus" and "Strawberry Fields" in mono? I so missed the panning and separation of everything.

Interesting. I would cite those two as examples of Beatles recordings that were ruined in stereo.

 

The stereo "Strawberry Fields" reveals all the recording tricks and anomalies that were so artfully concealed on the original mono single mix. The balance of the instruments is seriously off on the stereo as well.

 

The stereo "I Am The Walrus" is only stereo for the first half of the song, as there were elements recorded live to the original mono mix that couldn't be re-created. After the middle break, you're just hearing the mono mix with "fake stereo" processing. There's also some nasty editing on the stereo mix (right before "Yellow Matter Custard") to conceal a missing orchestral break that only exists in the original mono.

 

Admittedly, my opinion probably has more to do with the fact that the original mono singles were my first exposure to these songs - just as your experience is primarily from the LP versions. Either way, the different/unfamiliar mixes just sound wrong to us.

[Synthesizer Patel]

There is an article in the new issue of Rolling Stone about the game. In the article, Giles Martin talks somewhat about what he had to do with the tracks. Apparently, they have to be separated in order for them to be playable in the game. So he had to split all the tracks up, thus changing the way they have been heard all of these years. I may buy the cds, but I am in no way interested in a Beatles video game.

 

that's kind of annoying, because i was hoping that this would be a good indication of the stereo mixes on the cds. i can understand having the drums to one side and backing singing on the other, but having nothing in the middle of the mix just makes everything sound so seperated and flat. i've got no intention of buying the video game either. i'm also not too worried about having everything after Revolver being in stereo, although i'd rather have it in mono, but Rubber Soul sounds absolutely terrible in stereo on the versions i've heard. the big dilemma i have is that i only want the albums from Rubber Soul onwards so the only discs in the mono box set i actually want are Rubber Soul, Revolver and The White Album (and Magical Mystery Tour if that's in the box too) - I just don't want to be disappointed again with the modern beatles' estates ruining their legacy still further. how they can justify not remixing them by saying that they want them as they were originally done, and then not actually allowing people the chance to have the ACTUAL mono mixes that were the proper albums unless they buy a very expensive box set is just too annoying to think about!

 

"Nurse . . . my pills please!"

[mpolak21]

that's kind of annoying, because i was hoping that this would be a good indication of the stereo mixes on the cds. i can understand having the drums to one side and backing singing on the other, but having nothing in the middle of the mix just makes everything sound so seperated and flat. i've got no intention of buying the video game either. i'm also not too worried about having everything after Revolver being in stereo, although i'd rather have it in mono, but Rubber Soul sounds absolutely terrible in stereo on the versions i've heard. the big dilemma i have is that i only want the albums from Rubber Soul onwards so the only discs in the mono box set i actually want are Rubber Soul, Revolver and The White Album (and Magical Mystery Tour if that's in the box too) - I just don't want to be disappointed again with the modern beatles' estates ruining their legacy still further. how they can justify not remixing them by saying that they want them as they were originally done, and then not actually allowing people the chance to have the ACTUAL mono mixes that were the proper albums unless they buy a very expensive box set is just too annoying to think about!

 

"Nurse . . . my pills please!"

 

I might have to illegally download all of these (right now I have the Purple Chick sets on my ipod), if those are my options.

 

--Mike

[Analogman]

that's kind of annoying, because i was hoping that this would be a good indication of the stereo mixes on the cds. i can understand having the drums to one side and backing singing on the other, but having nothing in the middle of the mix just makes everything sound so seperated and flat. i've got no intention of buying the video game either. i'm also not too worried about having everything after Revolver being in stereo, although i'd rather have it in mono, but Rubber Soul sounds absolutely terrible in stereo on the versions i've heard. the big dilemma i have is that i only want the albums from Rubber Soul onwards so the only discs in the mono box set i actually want are Rubber Soul, Revolver and The White Album (and Magical Mystery Tour if that's in the box too) - I just don't want to be disappointed again with the modern beatles' estates ruining their legacy still further. how they can justify not remixing them by saying that they want them as they were originally done, and then not actually allowing people the chance to have the ACTUAL mono mixes that were the proper albums unless they buy a very expensive box set is just too annoying to think about!

 

"Nurse . . . my pills please!"

 

He said he had to do it in order for the tracks to work on the game. I guess his Dad was a bit taken back when he first heard the tracks after they had been changed. My understanding is that it was done for the game only, not the cd re-issues.

[Synthesizer Patel]

He said he had to do it in order for the tracks to work on the game. I guess his Dad was a bit taken back when he first heard the tracks after they had been changed. My understanding is that it was done for the game only, not the cd re-issues.

 

i'm not moaning about what he did for the game, i'm moaning that maybe they should have done it for the cd's too, because the stereo versions are not very good (i'm talking about the original ones here, although when they transfered them to cd they were even worse). i've got a bad feeling that the stereo mixes for the game are going to sound better than the stereo versions on the cd, and if they feel that they had to keep the same mixes as the ones released for historical purposes, then the only proper answer to that is that they should have released everything in mono up to and including the white album, as they are the historic versions that the beatles actually made, not the stereo ones.

 

so if he remixed them because he had to do so for the games, then why is Day Tripper in mono still? that doesn't make much sense when everything else is in stereo. anyone got any theories on this?

[bjorn_skurj]

I would be interested in a Beatles video game if it was an MMORPG in the Yellow Submarine universe.

[Analogman]

The "instruments" for the game.

 

I happened to see that photo on another message board. Why does Paul's bass have a tremolo bar on it?

 

 

Here is the answer:

 

That's because it's not a bass but a game controller... It looks like a bass but it isn't: you also have to be able to play all other guitarparts on it, like guitar parts! The fact that it LOOKS like a bass makes no difference: it's a game controller and so it has all controls it needs for this particular game, so... it also has a tremolo! In that regard it's the exact same controller as the other guitar shaped controllers.

[jimtweedy1977]

I'm really excited about the Mono Box set (I already have the entire catalog as it was initially released on cd), and since Mono is the better mix, I will probably skip the stereo remasters except for Let It Be and Abbey Road, which are not available in mono, apparently. However, it really bugs me that the box sets are not available yet for preorder, but they are available for preorder in the uk. does this mean that the box sets will only be released in the uk? i'm guessing at some point they'll at least be available on ebay.

[Analogman]

I nocticed that also. I did see a page at at Amazon.com for the boxsets, only pages for the individual cds.

[Col. Hapablap]

Pages for both the Stereo & Mono boxsets have been posted to amazon. Prices too!

 

 

The mono box set

 

 

The Stereo box set

[junkiesmile]

I'm torn. I can't buy both.

[Analogman]

That's about I figured. I don't think I can justify spending that amount of bread on boxsets (anymore). They should just give them away.

[DAngerer09]

why exactly would people rather here them in mono rather than stereo?

[cryptique]

You have to admit, some of those stereo mixes are pretty weird.

 

I know there are a lot of people who regard the mono mixes as the "true" mixes, but on that subject I'll happily defer to someone who knows more about the mono vs. stereo debate.

[DAngerer09]

yeah, just curious.

[Analogman]

We talked about that in this thread a while back:

 

It may start about here (not exactly sure).

[brianjeremy]

Good God, that crap's expensive. I can't swing that kind of dough for that. I just asked my wife and she was like "ain't no way!"

[JerseyMike]

I am confused. Are we talking about RE-MASTERING or RE-MIXING? The two are completely separate things.

Mixing involves how loud or soft each track (instrument) is heard on each song. Mastering is, basically, the overall eq of the entire record. For instance, have you ever noticed that when you take a cd out of your player and pop another one in, and its much louder eventhough you didn't change the volume? Thats part of mastering. I personally think most re-masters are a total sham. The average listener can't really tell if you boosted the highs or lows on a record, although it sometimes makes certain instruments "pop" a little more. So they boost the overall volume, throw in some bonus tracks in with a bigger booklet and get your money. There are definitely some records out there (Mr. Springsteen, I'm looking at you) that need to be remastered, but the Beatles aren't one of them. Plus, George Martin always wanted to add more compression to the White Album, and I fear that with John and George gone, he might get his wish. NOOOOOOOOO!!! Damn you Sir George!!!!!!!

[DAngerer09]

These looks like just Re-mastered versions, not remixed.

 

 

have you ever noticed that when you take a cd out of your player and pop another one in, and its much louder eventhough you didn't change the volume?

 

A Ghost is Born is ridiculously quiet compared to most of my other CDs

[Analogman]

I am confused. Are we talking about RE-MASTERING or RE-MIXING? The two are completely separate things.

Mixing involves how loud or soft each track (instrument) is heard on each song. Mastering is, basically, the overall eq of the entire record. For instance, have you ever noticed that when you take a cd out of your player and pop another one in, and its much louder eventhough you didn't change the volume? Thats part of mastering. I personally think most re-masters are a total sham. The average listener can't really tell if you boosted the highs or lows on a record, although it sometimes makes certain instruments "pop" a little more. So they boost the overall volume, throw in some bonus tracks in with a bigger booklet and get your money. There are definitely some records out there (Mr. Springsteen, I'm looking at you) that need to be remastered, but the Beatles aren't one of them. Plus, George Martin always wanted to add more compression to the White Album, and I fear that with John and George gone, he might get his wish. NOOOOOOOOO!!! Damn you Sir George!!!!!!!

 

If we are talking loudness wars, I agree. But other than that, there are good examples. The Byrds and Grateful Dead re-masters are two examples I would put forth as pretty darn good.

 

I don't think I've ever heard anyone say The Beatles cds (which were re-mastered in the mid 1980s, with early digital sound technology) did not need to be redone before.

[bigideas]

they charge more for the mono even though it has less discs (no Abbey Road, Yellow Sub or LiB)?

[cryptique]

I don't think they ever released mono versions of those albums. If I'm right about that, I imagine that's why they're not included here.

 

They can price this one higher because it's a "niche" product that a lot of people have been waiting for. It's not really for the casual fan, and those who want it will probably be willing to pay more for it.

 

I'm thinking of buying both, though that'll be quite a financial hit.

[Synthesizer Patel]

I am confused. Are we talking about RE-MASTERING or RE-MIXING? The two are completely separate things.

Mixing involves how loud or soft each track (instrument) is heard on each song. Mastering is, basically, the overall eq of the entire record. For instance, have you ever noticed that when you take a cd out of your player and pop another one in, and its much louder eventhough you didn't change the volume? Thats part of mastering. I personally think most re-masters are a total sham. The average listener can't really tell if you boosted the highs or lows on a record, although it sometimes makes certain instruments "pop" a little more. So they boost the overall volume, throw in some bonus tracks in with a bigger booklet and get your money. There are definitely some records out there (Mr. Springsteen, I'm looking at you) that need to be remastered, but the Beatles aren't one of them. Plus, George Martin always wanted to add more compression to the White Album, and I fear that with John and George gone, he might get his wish. NOOOOOOOOO!!! Damn you Sir George!!!!!!!

 

well that's not really true. you can remaster something and make instruments louder or softer in the mix, it has nothing to do with remixing. you can do this because you can work on isolated frequencies without touching the other frequencies - ie. bass is low, so you can boost different parts of the bass frequency which don't even register within the range of the guitars, for example - so that the bass becomes louder and yet the guitars remain at the same volume. remixing can be about moving the panning of the tracks, removing or adding instruments etc.... which is very different.

 

as for the mono and stereo debate. i've said many times:

 

the mono mixes are how the albums were made - therefore if you listen (especially, i find, with rubber soul - the stereo version has piano parts and vocal parts dropping out quite harshly because they were added whilst thinking about the music from a mono point of view, when dropping instruments in and out of the mix sounds more seemless).

 

the mono and stereo mixes use different takes, so the songs are often very different, well beyond the fact that one is mono and one is stereo

 

the mono mixes are louder and punchier

 

the mono mixes were the first mixes to make it to the moon

 

and the mono mixes could beat both batman and superman in a fight

[cryptique]

and the mono mixes could beat both batman and superman in a fight

Well, that seals it. I'll buy both!

 

 

Has anyone found these for sale anywhere but Amazon yet? I'm considering pre-ordering but I'd like to shop around a bit (though Amazon's usually the cheapest option, so I'll probably buy from them anyway).

[Moss]

Rock Band preview

 

Looks like they did it right. A couple seperate videos here.

 

Plus the remastered albums.