Synthesizer Patel Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 you can hear some samples on amazon now. clips from revolver and the white album. they're low bitrate, but still sound fuller than the old cds. hereit's just a shame that they should have remixed them, to make them sound better still. cos the mono box set in the apple bullshit wagon is tagged as for the purists.just listen to the taxman clip with headphones and tell me that album wasn't made to be heard in mono! Link to post Share on other sites
solace Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 right. i realize LOVE was remixed, but i just mean in the overall fullness/improvement i think it'll be pretty obvious to anyone with a half-way decent stereo setup, and VERY obvious to people with really nice setups. that's annoying that the Mono one is limited to 10k... hopefully there's decent first week sales, as i don't want to wait too long. Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Well, I hope the differences are as noticeable as you say, Joss, but as I said, I dont know how good they will have to sound for me to feel like I haven't been had. We shall see. I very much look forward to hearing Taxman in mono, though. Link to post Share on other sites
bigideas Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 you can hear some samples on amazon now. clips from revolver and the white album. they're low bitrate, but still sound fuller than the old cds. hereit's just a shame that they should have remixed them, to make them sound better still. cos the mono box set in the apple bullshit wagon is tagged as for the purists.just listen to the taxman clip with headphones and tell me that album wasn't made to be heard in mono! you don't like that stereo version of Taxman - i'm not quite following you. i thought there would be a mono version to compare. Link to post Share on other sites
solace Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 as shitty as my original CD's sound, esp. compared to the Ebett's ones, i won't feel rooked. i only paid $140 for all of the original CD's back in the 90's, i'd hope i could get like $50-60 for them all used. Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 right. i realize LOVE was remixed, but i just mean in the overall fullness/improvement i think it'll be pretty obvious to anyone with a half-way decent stereo setup, and VERY obvious to people with really nice setups. that's annoying that the Mono one is limited to 10k... hopefully there's decent first week sales, as i don't want to wait too long. yeah, everything sounds much better than the old versions. the trouble with the stereo stuff is that some songs work with the weird stereo panning they used in the past, and some don't. that taxman clip is a good example of how it doesn't. all of rubber soul suffers from this too. Well, I hope the differences are as noticeable as you say, Joss, but as I said, I dont know how good they will have to sound for me to feel like I haven't been had. We shall see. I very much look forward to hearing Taxman in mono, though. oh, that taxman clip on amazon is in stereo - put some headphones on and listen and you'll wonder how in the world they didn't remix the tracks for stereo properly. the far right of the channel is virtually empty apart from the cowbell and tambourine (knives and forks, or whatever it is) coming in randomly. on the mono version it doesn't sound random because it's mixed into the song properly. you don't like that stereo version of Taxman - i'm not quite following you. i thought there would be a mono version to compare. no i don't like it. well you must be able to hear without a mono comparison that the song was arranged in mono and not for stereo (see what i said above). Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 Truth be told, I'm a little scared of actually getting more out of listening to The Beatles than I have been. Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 So is my best option to get the mono box set and buy Yellow Submarine, Abbey Road, and Let It Be separately? Is that Mono Masters CD going to include everything on Past Masters or will I need to buy that one separately, too? Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 So is my best option to get the mono box set and buy Yellow Submarine, Abbey Road, and Let It Be separately? Is that Mono Masters CD going to include everything on Past Masters or will I need to buy that one separately, too? it's the best option in terms of getting the best versions. however, it's not the best option based on the price. if you have the money, get it. the mono mixes are so much better there really isn't any kind of contest from that point of view. and yeah, the past masters is in the mono box set too - all the same tracks in mono (old brown shoe sounds amazing in mono, and very dull in stereo for one). Link to post Share on other sites
bjorn_skurj Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 i'll definitely listen to them before i buy, but if the sound quality is on par with the LOVE disc, it'll be a huge upgrade.Yes. Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted July 28, 2009 Share Posted July 28, 2009 it's the best option in terms of getting the best versions. however, it's not the best option based on the price. if you have the money, get it. the mono mixes are so much better there really isn't any kind of contest from that point of view. and yeah, the past masters is in the mono box set too - all the same tracks in mono (old brown shoe sounds amazing in mono, and very dull in stereo for one). I think it's worth it regardless of the price. The difference between the two Taxmans was pretty striking. Link to post Share on other sites
imsjry Posted August 1, 2009 Share Posted August 1, 2009 Other than the bass sounding a bit "punchier", what is the big difference? I guess as someone who grew up on the stereo versions, I don't see the love or want for mono. To me mono is like listening in black and white and the stereo is like listening in 3D color. Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted August 2, 2009 Share Posted August 2, 2009 Other than the bass sounding a bit "punchier", what is the big difference? I guess as someone who grew up on the stereo versions, I don't see the love or want for mono. To me mono is like listening in black and white and the stereo is like listening in 3D color. everything sounds different, if you can't hear that then you might as well just stick with the versions you have already, i wouldn't fork out for the new remasters at all. the stereo version is, at best, an interesting alternative to hear the various parts seperated - it's not the proper song. the mono version is black and white, and the stereo is like Jaws 3D. everyone else releases their albums in mono today, if they were recorded in the mono era, with stereo alternatives as a bonus. if anything the stereo versions should be the collectors box set, and the mono versions should be the standard. they sound like a jigsaw puzzle that's been taken apart and mixed up on the floor - all the pieces are there to make the image, but they aren't in the right order, and therefore, only interesting to purists who want to hear an alternative to the proper artifact. Link to post Share on other sites
Littlebear Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Mono is definitely better than stereo for the tracks recorded in mono. The difference between "Help!" (the song) in mono and the stereo version is important. The mono sound is more punchy, and the vocal harmonies sound more enthusiastic. Missing the mono versions is missing the way every people listened to them then, on radio, singles, EPs, LPs... The mono sound helps to understand the beatles phenomenon. Link to post Share on other sites
bigideas Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 If someone responded to me on the last page I can't read it - something is messing up my browser causing an error pop-up and won't let me scroll down. Link to post Share on other sites
imsjry Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 Mono is definitely better than stereo for the tracks recorded in mono. The difference between "Help!" (the song) in mono and the stereo version is important. The mono sound is more punchy, and the vocal harmonies sound more enthusiastic. Missing the mono versions is missing the way every people listened to them then, on radio, singles, EPs, LPs... The mono sound helps to understand the beatles phenomenon. I guess I always assumed most people grew up on the stereo versions like I did. To me, those are the correct versions. I have never heard a mono version of a Post-"Hard Day's Night" Beatles song on the radio now that I think about it it. So when I hear the mono's they just sound.....not right. And are you guys saying the the Beatles themselves had ZERO involvement in the stereo mastering of their albums? That is amazing if so and I always felt that sound was part of their genius. For me, the stereo effect is used almost like another instrument and is integral to many of their songs. Call me crazy.... Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 I guess I always assumed most people grew up on the stereo versions like I did. To me, those are the correct versions. I have never heard a mono version of a Post-"Hard Day's Night" Beatles song on the radio now that I think about it it. So when I hear the mono's they just sound.....not right. And are you guys saying the the Beatles themselves had ZERO involvement in the stereo mastering of their albums? That is amazing if so and I always felt that sound was part of their genius. For me, the stereo effect is used almost like another instrument and is integral to many of their songs. Call me crazy.... yep, they had no involvement in the stereo mixes, right up until Abbey Road - which they did in stereo. george martin didn't even do them, they got other engineers, because it was just seen as a fad. they aren't actually even in stereo as such anyway - it's called false stereo - where the 4 mono tracks (which have been bounced down however many times), or 2 tracks on some of the earlier stuff, are panned left and right and center, so that it creates a stereo effect. that's not how a proper stereo mix works really. don't take what you heard growing up as what is best. didn't the american releases put reverb on a load of the stuff too, for some strange reason? Link to post Share on other sites
bigideas Posted August 3, 2009 Share Posted August 3, 2009 to someone who's heard Taxmen stereo and mono mixes - is there an extra guitar lead or solo bit on the mono? i remember when a local station had a "Fab Four at 4" thing every day and they played Taxman and i'm pretty sure there were some different bits than the stereo CD version i have. Link to post Share on other sites
Moss Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 don't take what you heard growing up as what is best. didn't the american releases put reverb on a load of the stuff too, for some strange reason? America sure got screwed over when it comes to Beatles releases. So there is no option to mix and match Mono and Stereo at a reduced price? That would be perfect. Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 to someone who's heard Taxmen stereo and mono mixes - is there an extra guitar lead or solo bit on the mono? i remember when a local station had a "Fab Four at 4" thing every day and they played Taxman and i'm pretty sure there were some different bits than the stereo CD version i have. i don't think there is such a thing. maybe it was a dream you had? the mono version isn't that much different in terms of the music - the only difference is that the cowbell & percussion come in later on the mono version. the mono version really puts the stabbing guitar sounds right up front - that's the sound of the taxman really sticking the knife in, which is totally lacking in the stereo mix. America sure got screwed over when it comes to Beatles releases. So there is no option to mix and match Mono and Stereo at a reduced price? That would be perfect. the ideal thing would be for them to put the stereo and mono either on the same disc (which would be easy for most of the albums, as they are short) or have them on a second disc - and get rid of all that crap about documentaries - which looks like it's just crap put together from the anthology series. i've actually got a feeling they'll do something like this in the future. or release the mono versions seperately. never trust old hippies! they'll screw you over with peace and love just as soon as look at ya! Link to post Share on other sites
bigideas Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 yeah - stereo and mono should have been on the same disc - if they had bonus tracks, i could excuse it, but the docs ain't cuttin' it! all their albums are under 40 mins other than maybe Sgt Pep's, Abbey Road - and of course the White Album. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 The Stones could have done that also. But, they did not. I suppose they are going for the big money on this deal. Link to post Share on other sites
solace Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 yeah - stereo and mono should have been on the same disc - if they had bonus tracks, i could excuse it, but the docs ain't cuttin' it! all their albums are under 40 mins other than maybe Sgt Pep's, Abbey Road - and of course the White Album. i'm actually glad they're not on the same disc. nothing bugs me more than re-issues that mess with the original tracklisting (yeah i realize you can stop it after the original tracklist ends, but still) i'd prefer all re-issues never fuck with the original tracklist and include any bonus tracks, etc. on extra discs. Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted August 4, 2009 Share Posted August 4, 2009 That's interesting. You would hate the The Complete Blue Horizon Sessions 1967–1969 (Fleetwood Mac boxset) then. I suppose that does not bother me. I think what bugs me is when things start being re-mixed or have things added to tracks after the fact. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts