Beatles remasters are here!

[Synthesizer Patel]

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.

 

surely having mono and stereo on the same disc can't be as annoying as being ripped off like they're doing here? i mean, obviously the ideal thing would be 3 disc - 1 mono, 1 stereo, and a disc of bonus material. which is what the Bee Gees recently did with Odessa. but, i guess the beatles material doesn't warrant that kind of care.

[Analogman]

surely having mono and stereo on the same disc can't be as annoying as being ripped off like they're doing here? i mean, obviously the ideal thing would be 3 disc - 1 mono, 1 stereo, and a disc of bonus material. which is what the Bee Gees recently did with Odessa. but, i guess the beatles material doesn't warrant that kind of care.

 

I acquired that a while back.

[Synthesizer Patel]

I acquired that a while back.

 

I think that's down to Rhino - they always do a great job of reissuing material. I think the fact that these beatles reissues are coming out at the same time as The Beatles Rock Band Game gives you an idea of how Apple treat their material.

[bigideas]

if stereo/mono on the same disc bothers someone enough, they can just burn a seperate CD(s).

i'm thinking dollars and cents...

[imsjry]

if stereo/mono on the same disc bothers someone enough, they can just burn a seperate CD(s).

i'm thinking dollars and cents...

 

So after all this conversation, what is the best way to own these? Buy the mono box and then Yellow Sub, Abbey, and Let it Be separate? If the mono is supposed to be the best way to hear this music, why is it only a limited release? I just don't get the logic there.

[MattZ]

If the mono is supposed to be the best way to hear this music, why is it only a limited release? I just don't get the logic there.

 

There is no best way. No matter what people will tell you.

[solace]

surely having mono and stereo on the same disc can't be as annoying as being ripped off like they're doing here? i mean, obviously the ideal thing would be 3 disc - 1 mono, 1 stereo, and a disc of bonus material. which is what the Bee Gees recently did with Odessa. but, i guess the beatles material doesn't warrant that kind of care.

 

i'm buying them for the upgraded sound quality, that's it. i don't care about any bonus material in this instance, so as long as they sound good, no way i'll feel ripped off.

 

it's The Beatles, they're worth it no matter.

[Elixir Sue]

So after all this conversation, what is the best way to own these? Buy the mono box and then Yellow Sub, Abbey, and Let it Be separate?

This is how I plan on doing it.

[Synthesizer Patel]

So after all this conversation, what is the best way to own these? Buy the mono box and then Yellow Sub, Abbey, and Let it Be separate? If the mono is supposed to be the best way to hear this music, why is it only a limited release? I just don't get the logic there.

 

if you want the albums that the beatles made themselves then get the mono ones. i can't understand why people don't understand that. the albums were made in mono - they were arranged in mono - the vocals were mixed in mono - everything was in mono. then the engineers took the bounced down tracks and panned them into stereo. there is no way in the world that the beatles would have made the albums sound like that if they were thinking about the finished results in stereo. is abbey road mixed in the same way? no.

 

it's easy to say that doesn't mean mono is best. ok. if people think it isn't. but, it does mean the stereo alternative isn't the actual album the beatles made - there is no matter of taste or opinion about it.

 

the mono box set is limited because they are ripping people off. they'll release them all seperately next christmas, you wait and see. they want to sell the stereo ones first and then offer up the mono later on.

 

i'm buying them for the upgraded sound quality, that's it. i don't care about any bonus material in this instance, so as long as they sound good, no way i'll feel ripped off.

 

it's The Beatles, they're worth it no matter.

 

feeling ripped off and being ripped off are two different things.

[solace]

feeling ripped off and being ripped off are two different things.

eh, debateable.

what are you buying these for then if not simply the improved sound quality?

 

the Anthologies were for all the bonus tracks/collectors, not these.

 

i mean fuck i think i own at least 4 copies of The White album honestly.

[Synthesizer Patel]

eh, debateable.

what are you buying these for then if not simply the improved sound quality?

 

the Anthologies were for all the bonus tracks/collectors, not these.

 

i mean fuck i think i own at least 4 copies of The White album honestly.

 

i cancelled my preorders last week. after listening a number of times to the stereo clips, i came to the conclusion that i would always feel gyped if i had them only. so, i'm currently not getting it. the only thing is i need to either just fork out for the mono box set - or take a gamble that they'll release them seperately in the future. i think it's a pretty good gamble, but the other thing is that they don't and these mono box sets end up being like gold dust.

[imsjry]

i cancelled my preorders last week. after listening a number of times to the stereo clips, i came to the conclusion that i would always feel gyped if i had them only. so, i'm currently not getting it. the only thing is i need to either just fork out for the mono box set - or take a gamble that they'll release them seperately in the future. i think it's a pretty good gamble, but the other thing is that they don't and these mono box sets end up being like gold dust.

 

Or you can just always download and burn the invevitable FLAC versions. Not that I would personally ever do or abvocate such a thing....

[solace]

i cancelled my preorders last week. after listening a number of times to the stereo clips, i came to the conclusion that i would always feel gyped if i had them only. so, i'm currently not getting it. the only thing is i need to either just fork out for the mono box set - or take a gamble that they'll release them seperately in the future. i think it's a pretty good gamble, but the other thing is that they don't and these mono box sets end up being like gold dust.

were you listening to the clips on Amazon?

honestly those sounded identical to the old CD releases to me. wouldn't surprise me if they weren't actually sourced from the remasters yet cuz they haven't sent out ANY sort of promos and are pressing them very late to avoid leaks.

 

i'll wait until i hear the ACTUAL things first before i decide if i want to buy or not.

 

edit: nevermind, i see they updated with the ACTUAL remastered clips now on the Beatles Amazon frontpage. those sound waaaaaay better.

[Synthesizer Patel]

Or you can just always download and burn the invevitable FLAC versions. Not that I would personally ever do or abvocate such a thing....

 

oh, i'll definately be doing that if i don't buy it. i'll only be sharing it with "collectors" though, cos that's the only people the remaining beatles think will be interested in it.

[MattZ]

joss, my comment that there is no best way to listen to these albums wasnt an attempt to debate that the stereo mixes were blessed by the Beatles. There is no arguing that point. And people can let that fact sway them as they wish, of course. But you are going to have a hard time convincing me that we should write off how people have been listening to, and loving, the Beatles for the last 40 years. That may an overstatement of what you are saying, but it certainly seems like a fair leap based on what you've been saying here.

 

And for what it is worth, I will be buying the mono box.

[solace]

agreed.

 

just because you find the mono versions vastly superior doesn't mean we should all discount anything we've heard the last 30 years.

[Synthesizer Patel]

were you listening to the clips on Amazon?

honestly those sounded identical to the old CD releases to me. wouldn't surprise me if they weren't actually sourced from the remasters yet cuz they haven't sent out ANY sort of promos and are pressing them very late to avoid leaks.

 

i'll wait until i hear the ACTUAL things first before i decide if i want to buy or not.

 

edit: nevermind, i see they updated with the ACTUAL remastered clips now on the Beatles Amazon frontpage. those sound waaaaaay better.

 

yeah. but, those clips on amazon are definately remastered. even with the low bitrate, they sound much crisper and fuller than the old cds. it's not the remastering of the stereo - or sound as such - i have a problem with, it's just that they sound flat compared to the mono ones, and that is the fault of the mixing. and that's based on the scratched up vinyl i've got, and mp3's dr ebbett. i can only imagine how good the remastered mono is going to sound.

[imsjry]

joss, my comment that there is no best way to listen to these albums wasnt an attempt to debate that the stereo mixes were blessed by the Beatles. There is no arguing that point. And people can let that fact sway them as they wish, of course. But you are going to have a hard time convincing me that we should write off how people have been listening to, and loving, the Beatles for the last 40 years. That may an overstatement of what you are saying, but it certainly seems like a fair leap based on what you've been saying here.

 

This is a great point. When I recently heard Strawberry Fields in mono for the first time in my life, it just sounded......wrong. I really missed all the panning and stuff because I always felt that was such a huge part of the song. Same goes for Walrus and Tomorrow Never Knows.

 

The good news is it's going to be like hearing The Beatles "new" all over again for me in mono.

[bigideas]

did we ever address:

 

are these Stereo mixes the same as the CD versions we've had - just remastered - or totally new mixes?

 

also -

 

were the Cd's that have been out for all these years the exact mixes you would find if you bought the stereo LP back in the day - or were they remixed back then (in the 80's when the cd's came out)?

[imsjry]

One more question:

 

If the Mono Box is so "limited", will it even be available at say Best Buy and other chains? I only can find a pre-order on a few sites (Amazon, B&N).

[Analogman]

did we ever address:

 

are these Stereo mixes the same as the CD versions we've had - just remastered - or totally new mixes?

 

also -

 

were the Cd's that have been out for all these years the exact mixes you would find if you bought the stereo LP back in the day - or were they remixed back then (in the 80's when the cd's came out)?

 

No remixing, just re-mastering. I hope they used the master tapes, and not some digital transfer that was done in the 1980s.

 

I think it depends on if you had the Capitol versions, or the EMI/Apple versions of the records.

 

I grew up with the Capitol versions.

[Analogman]

Source: Yahoo Music News

 

Beatles copyrights in McCartney's (distant) sights

Reuters, Aug 9, 2009 11:00 pm PDT

 

In nine short years, Paul McCartney will hit the jackpot again.

 

The 67-year-old former Beatle -- already worth about 440 million pounds ($737 million), according to a report by Britain's Sunday Times in April -- will be able to start reclaiming the copyrights to the lucrative Beatles catalog.

 

He and John Lennon, the Fab Four's primary songwriters, lost control of pop's most coveted catalog as the band was falling apart. They continued to receive songwriting royalties, but have lost out on a massive windfall over the years from licensing deals.

 

All but a handful of Beatles copyrights eventually ended up with Michael Jackson, and these 250-or-so songs form the crown jewel of Sony/ATV Music Publishing, a 50-50 joint venture between the late singer and Sony Corp.

 

The U.S. Copyright Act of 1976 gave songwriters the ability to recapture the publishing share of the copyright on pre-1978 works after two consecutive 28-year terms or 56 years. That means Beatles compositions registered in 1962 will be eligible for reversion in the United States in 2018, while songs written in 1970 will be eligible in 2026.

 

Under a clause in the Copyright Act, heirs of songwriters who die during the first 28-year term can recapture the publisher's portion of copyrighted works at the end of that term. In the case of Lennon, who died in 1980, the publisher's portion of his share of the Lennon-McCartney catalog for songs written in 1962 became eligible for reversion in 1990, while songs written in 1970 were eligible in 1998.

 

Sources say that Sony/ATV cut a deal with Lennon's widow, Yoko Ono, prior to the reversion dates to retain its publisher's share for the life of the copyright.

 

In the internecine history of the Beatles' publishing, Lennon and McCartney effectively lost control of the group's song rights even while the group was still a recording entity, in 1969.

 

That was when Northern Songs, the company established six years earlier solely to publish their joint compositions by English publisher Dick James and Beatles manager Brian Epstein, was sold to British media tycoon Lew Grade's ATV Music. Ownership of ATV subsequently passed to Australian billionaire Robert Holmes a Court and then, in 1985, to Jackson, who paid $47.5 million for the company.

 

In 1995, Sony came into the picture, forming a joint venture with trusts formed by Jackson, creating a new entity: Sony/ATV Music Publishing. Under the deal, Sony paid Jackson $110 million and gave him a 50% stake in the merged company, which at the time was valued at about $500 million, according to the 2007 book 'Northern Songs: The True Story of the Beatles' Song Publishing Empire' by Brian Southall with Rupert Perry. Sources estimate that Sony/ATV is now valued at about $1.7 billion.

 

Sony/ATV's Beatle holdings essentially represent everything recorded under the Beatles name by Lennon and McCartney, except for five songs: the A- and B-sides of their first U.K. singles, "Love Me Do"/"P.S. I Love You" (owned by McCartney); "Please Please Me"/"Ask Me Why" (administered by Universal Music); and "Penny Lane," owned by Catherine Holmes a Court, the daughter of the late magnate.

 

In the meantime, Sony/ATV is aggressively exploiting its Beatles copyrights. The deal with MTV Networks to develop the forthcoming "The Beatles: Rock Band" videogame is one indication of that.

 

(Reporting by Ed Christman, Susan Butler and Paul Sexton)

 

(Editing by Dean Goodman at Reuters)

[bigideas]

No remixing, just re-mastering. I hope they used the master tapes, and not some digital transfer that was done in the 1980s.

 

I think it depends on if you had the Capitol versions, or the EMI/Apple versions of the records.

 

I grew up with the Capitol versions.

 

I didn't think about the Parlophone/Capitol being different other than tracklistings/titles.

 

I think in Geoff Emerick's book he said the original US LP's were mastered in the US - but i'm not a 100% sure, it's been a while since i read it.

 

so if you bought a copy of Revolver from the UK/parlophone and then in the US/Capitol back in '66, not only would there be a different tracklisting, but different mastering - not a 100% sure though.

 

OH Well,

at the end of the day, you still get the songs and most/to all of the same parts (some may be louder or better represented one way), which is the true essence anyway.

[cryptique]

Well, fuck.

 

Yesterday (8/12) I put the stereo and mono box sets into my Amazon cart, but didn't pull the trigger to buy them (I was going to wait until tomorrow -- payday).

 

Today I find that the mono set has been moved out of my cart into the "saved items" section, and the product page now has this message:

 

Important Beatles "Mono Box Set" Message

The Beatles Mono Box Set is a limited production item, and we are sold out, but we have the Beatles Stereo Box Set available for pre-order. Visit our Beatles Store to shop the Beatles remastered CDs, The Beatles: Rock Band, DVDs, books, and so much more.

I had heard that this was a limited edition thing, but did anyone really expect it to be so limited that it would sell out four weeks before the release date?

 

I signed up for an e-mail if the item becomes available again, but at this point I'm thinking that I missed the boat.

[cryptique]

OK, I thought it was an Amazon exclusive. It's available for pre-order at a few other places, including Tower, Amoeba, Borders, Barnes & Noble, MusicDirect, and CDUniverse.

 

I just ordered it from Tower -- a bit cheaper than the other prices I've seen.