bleedorange Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 It's a good kind of dirty, though. I've ordered them both now. Starting to think about Rock Band... Still haven't pulled the trigger, yet, although a friend of mine has already ordered the mono set. I might ask for the stereo set for Christmas and then we can both have both. I preordered Rock Band, however, as soon as it was announced. I cannot wait for that. Link to post Share on other sites
bigideas Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 That's true, but I ordered the mono set last Friday morning(the 14th). It's now Monday afternoon and I'm still waiting for any kind of response from tower. I'm going to file a claim with my bank tomorrow if i don't hear from them by then. I hope i do hear something, but I'm skeptical. I ordered the stereo box set on Sunday from amazon, and when i clicked "place your order," I got an confirmation order with a tracking order number about 30 seconds later. That's how it should be done, and apparently the person who ordered from tower.com a few posts back got the virtually the same deal. I didn't get anything, except a charge on my credit card. I don't even have the order listed on my tower.com account. I think something went horribly wrong with my order. The good news is that my bank told me that if i file a claim tomorrow(Tues.), that i would likely get my money back into my account within 7-10 days. I think I'm gonna try ordering the mono set from Best Buy. Hopefully it'll work out. i've had that response. it's like a bank. if you do something at the end of the day it won't be posted until the next work day. at a place like Tower if you do something on Friday you might not hear back until monday. did they have an 800 number to call? Link to post Share on other sites
Col. Hapablap Posted August 18, 2009 Share Posted August 18, 2009 Ok good news. It's all fixed! I finally got an email response from tower. They said that the order never went through successfully, and that authorization for the purchase mistakenly appeared as a charge on my card. Tower said that since the order was unsuccessful, my bank would figure that out and put the money back into my account within 3-7 days. I checked my account today, and there the money was! I immediately withdrew the money, went to Best Buy, put the money on a gift card, and ordered the set from bestbuy.com. I got a confirmation email from them instantly! I do have to get a new credit card though. When i called my bank Saturday about the charge, they deactivated my credit card. I guess they thought it could be fraudulent and they did that as a precaution. That wasn't the case of course, i knew that too, it was just a botched transaction. I'm glad they played it extra safe & I'm not upset. I'll get a new card in about a week. I'm just so relieved everything worked out and fixed itself. $260 is a lot of cash to lose! Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted August 18, 2009 Author Share Posted August 18, 2009 Glad to hear it worked out OK, though it sucks that you have to get a new card. Certainly could be worse, I suppose. Link to post Share on other sites
Central Scrutinizer Posted August 19, 2009 Share Posted August 19, 2009 I didn't see this previously within this thread. Apologize if redundant. From Beatlesnews.com Details of Beatles Remasters summarized in Chicago by David Haber, Beatles News Editor On August 15 at the 2009 Fest for Beatles Fans in Chicago, respected journalist and Beatles historian Matt Hurwitz and Beatles author Bruce Spizer gave a presentation to the large audience of Beatles fans about the remastering of the Beatles catalogue, which will be released this September 9th, 09-09-09. Both Mr. Hurwitz and Mr. Spizer have had the privilege of hearing some of the remasters. Below is a summary of what we know about the 09-09-09 Beatles remasters. http://www.beatlesnews.com/news/the-beatles/200908151922/details-of-beatles-remasters-summarized-in-chicago.html Link to post Share on other sites
imsjry Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 http://www.beatlesnews.com/news/the-beatles/200908151922/details-of-beatles-remasters-summarized-in-chicago.html So did anyone else plow through this? Could they have made these releases any more complicated? I have so many questions I don't know where to start. Like when they talk about using the "stereo masters" for the Rubber Soul Mono release. Huh? It still seems like the stereo box is the way to go just so you can have all the discs instead of having to buy Let It Be and Abbey Road separately. Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted August 21, 2009 Author Share Posted August 21, 2009 So did anyone else plow through this? Could they have made these releases any more complicated? I have so many questions I don't know where to start. Like when they talk about using the "stereo masters" for the Rubber Soul Mono release. Huh?The Rubber Soul disc in the mono box will have both the mono mixes and the original 1965 stereo mixes. They didn't use the stereo masters to create the mono mixes -- they put both mixes on that disc. It still seems like the stereo box is the way to go just so you can have all the discs instead of having to buy Let It Be and Abbey Road separately.Sure, but most people who will buy the mono box will probably also buy the stereo box. Like me. Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted August 21, 2009 Author Share Posted August 21, 2009 OK, a question about the Beatles Rock Band... I've been reading the product descriptions, and it looks to me like the limited edition bundle provides only a bass and drums (plus the software, obviously). If you want the Beatles-branded guitars, you have to buy them separately at $100 a pop. So if you want the whole set, it's going to cost $450, and even then you'll still only have one microphone (unless you already had others). Oh, and this doesn't include the game console (which I don't have). Am I reading it right? Anyone get a different take from the info that's available online? Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 OK, a question about the Beatles Rock Band... I've been reading the product descriptions, and it looks to me like the limited edition bundle provides only a bass and drums (plus the software, obviously). If you want the Beatles-branded guitars, you have to buy them separately at $100 a pop. So if you want the whole set, it's going to cost $450, and even then you'll still only have one microphone (unless you already had others). Oh, and this doesn't include the game console (which I don't have). Am I reading it right? Anyone get a different take from the info that's available online? I believe that is all correct. Although, I'm pretty sure you can use the included headset that comes with the console as another microphone. Link to post Share on other sites
Littlebear Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 http://www.beatlesnews.com/news/the-beatles/200908151922/details-of-beatles-remasters-summarized-in-chicago.html I was aware of everything said in this link, except for this: "The primary version of each album is the stereo version." I'm not sure what it means. Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Could they have made these releases any more complicated? Seriously. It's like they want me confused enough that I buy everything they're offering. I bought them all on cassette in the 80s, then on CD later in the decade, then a bunch on vinyl in the 90s/now. I bought the Anthologies on CD and DVD. Will I really get "more" out of these releases sonically? I listened to those two Taxman clips - couldn't hear a remarkable difference. Is it because of my little stereo speakers? Link to post Share on other sites
solace Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 OK, a question about the Beatles Rock Band... I've been reading the product descriptions, and it looks to me like the limited edition bundle provides only a bass and drums (plus the software, obviously). If you want the Beatles-branded guitars, you have to buy them separately at $100 a pop. So if you want the whole set, it's going to cost $450, and even then you'll still only have one microphone (unless you already had others). Oh, and this doesn't include the game console (which I don't have). Am I reading it right? Anyone get a different take from the info that's available online?wow. i guess i read it totally wrong when it was initially released, that's an insane amount of cash if you wanted that whole thing... damn. glad i already have all my RB2 stuff and an extra guitar. I'll just need another mic Link to post Share on other sites
Analogman Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Seriously. It's like they want me confused enough that I buy everything they're offering. I bought them all on cassette in the 80s, then on CD later in the decade, then a bunch on vinyl in the 90s/now. I bought the Anthologies on CD and DVD. Will I really get "more" out of these releases sonically? I listened to those two Taxman clips - couldn't hear a remarkable difference. Is it because of my little stereo speakers? That's what Lefsezt said the other day - why bother, as not many people have good stereos anymore, and the cd is dead. I don't think I will buy them due to the price. Link to post Share on other sites
MattZ Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Let me preface everything I am about to say by mentioning at the outset, that much of this is meant tongue in cheek: Can someone explain to me the fuss over Beatles Rock Band? Or Rock Band, for that matter? I start out with the following assumptions: that video games seek to recreate fantasy for all of us, and the closer these games get to reality, the more enticing they are. Because you can be dropped into a war zone somewhere with a backpack and a bazooka, and singlehandedly fight 3000 guerrilla terrorists to save the girl. And the more real it seems, the more exciting. But doens't the "more real" have to apply to "fantasy"? No one will ever fight terrorists in real life. So, the more realistic, the better. What is the corollary here? As you get more realistic, you get closer to what? (And here is the Stan's dad from South Park comment) can't you just pick up a guitar with a bunch of friends and achieve reality? Why use a video game to approach realism, when the realism already exists? Why spend $500 on Beatles Rock Band when you can buy a guitar and jam with friends? I suppose the simple answer to all of this is that Rock Band is fun? Well, I guess that's a good enough reason to do it. Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted August 21, 2009 Author Share Posted August 21, 2009 I've never played it, so I can't say. Until this morning, I nearly got caught up in the hype of the box set releases to the point of buying the game, plus a console, plus the additional guitar controllers. Then I realized how much all that was going to cost me, and financial reality set in. The box sets are important to me, but the game ... I can skip it. Link to post Share on other sites
bleedorange Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Let me preface everything I am about to say by mentioning at the outset, that much of this is meant tongue in cheek: Can someone explain to me the fuss over Beatles Rock Band? Or Rock Band, for that matter? I start out with the following assumptions: that video games seek to recreate fantasy for all of us, and the closer these games get to reality, the more enticing they are. Because you can be dropped into a war zone somewhere with a backpack and a bazooka, and singlehandedly fight 3000 guerrilla terrorists to save the girl. And the more real it seems, the more exciting. But doens't the "more real" have to apply to "fantasy"? No one will ever fight terrorists in real life. So, the more realistic, the better. What is the corollary here? As you get more realistic, you get closer to what? (And here is the Stan's dad from South Park comment) can't you just pick up a guitar with a bunch of friends and achieve reality? Why use a video game to approach realism, when the realism already exists? Why spend $500 on Beatles Rock Band when you can buy a guitar and jam with friends? I suppose the simple answer to all of this is that Rock Band is fun? Well, I guess that's a good enough reason to do it. I can't play any musical instruments. And as much as I would like to learn, I just don't have the time. Maybe when my daughter gets older we can take father-daughter lessons together. But it is incredibly fun to play. And the style of game appeals to my interests and the way my brain works. And playing together with friends is even more fun. Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Will I really get "more" out of these releases sonically? I listened to those two Taxman clips - couldn't hear a remarkable difference. Is it because of my little stereo speakers? when you say you couldn't hear a remarkable difference, what differences did you hear? the mono version has that jagged guitar right up front with everything playing second fiddle to that, in the stereo mix it's not up front. the mono version is driving and powerful - and remember that the mono version is not remastered, the stereo clip i posted is remastered - so the remastered mono is going to sound even better. if you've got rubbish speakers then the best way to hear the problem with the stereo mix is through headphones - that's when the mix really sounds bad, speakers blends the sound a little better to make it less obvious of the panning. it's really funny to hear people saying they don't get let it be and abbey road in the mono, so they'll buy the stereo box - surely just buying them seperate will be best. what i'd say at this point is just download them all illegally in flac - both mono and stereo, and then make your mind up after that. by that time they'll have a release date for the mono discs as seperate purchases and you'll save yourself a fortune. don't waste your money on the box sets - no music is worth paying that much for! Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 when you say you couldn't hear a remarkable difference, what differences did you hear? the mono version has that jagged guitar right up front with everything playing second fiddle to that, in the stereo mix it's not up front. the mono version is driving and powerful - and remember that the mono version is not remastered, the stereo clip i posted is remastered - so the remastered mono is going to sound even better. if you've got rubbish speakers then the best way to hear the problem with the stereo mix is through headphones - that's when the mix really sounds bad, speakers blends the sound a little better to make it less obvious of the panning. I forget what I heard, I should try again w/headphones. Are those links still live? Link to post Share on other sites
solace Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 Let me preface everything I am about to say by mentioning at the outset, that much of this is meant tongue in cheek: Can someone explain to me the fuss over Beatles Rock Band? Or Rock Band, for that matter? I start out with the following assumptions: that video games seek to recreate fantasy for all of us, and the closer these games get to reality, the more enticing they are. Because you can be dropped into a war zone somewhere with a backpack and a bazooka, and singlehandedly fight 3000 guerrilla terrorists to save the girl. And the more real it seems, the more exciting. But doens't the "more real" have to apply to "fantasy"? No one will ever fight terrorists in real life. So, the more realistic, the better. What is the corollary here? As you get more realistic, you get closer to what? (And here is the Stan's dad from South Park comment) can't you just pick up a guitar with a bunch of friends and achieve reality? Why use a video game to approach realism, when the realism already exists? Why spend $500 on Beatles Rock Band when you can buy a guitar and jam with friends? I suppose the simple answer to all of this is that Rock Band is fun? Well, I guess that's a good enough reason to do it. even as someone who has played music since i was 11, Rock Band is insanely fun with a group of friends, especially ones who have zero actual music ability. sure it's glorified Karaoke, but still and you don't have to spend $500 to get going with it, you can get the original RB w/ all the instruments for under $100 these days, all of which are compatible with Beatles Rock Band, Guitar Hero World Tour, Guitar Hero 5, etc. Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 I forget what I heard, I should try again w/headphones. Are those links still live? Maybe they are. I can't remember what page I posted them on. Remember they are both in bad bitrate, but only the stereo has been remastered. Link to post Share on other sites
Sir Stewart Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 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! I think this was it. Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 I think this was it. yeah, that's it: taxman - stereo (track 11 to the right) remasteredtaxman - mono (must be vinyl source) unremastered (is that a word?) you should also be able to hear on the mono version how the percussion fits into the mix, and that bass is thumping because its sound is being boosted by the drums, and vice versa. edit: also, here's so people don't complain and say youtube has better sound than amazon clips (this sounds even weaker) Link to post Share on other sites
cryptique Posted August 21, 2009 Author Share Posted August 21, 2009 unremastered (is that a word?)If "unretouched" is a word, then so is "unremastered." Link to post Share on other sites
Synthesizer Patel Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 If "unretouched" is a word, then so is "unremastered." good. then i'll say it again "Unremastered! Unremastered! I'm mad as hell, and I'm unremastered!" Link to post Share on other sites
imsjry Posted August 21, 2009 Share Posted August 21, 2009 The Rubber Soul disc in the mono box will have both the mono mixes and the original 1965 stereo mixes. They didn't use the stereo masters to create the mono mixes -- they put both mixes on that disc. Why is the stereo mix also included on the mono version of Rubber Soul? I don't understand. Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts