Beatles remasters are here!

[bobbob1313]

So, I think I've got it figured out: disregarding nostalgia, the mono versions are pretty much pointless.

 

If you are listening in headphones, the early albums are pretty jarring in stereo (unless they've fixed them somewhat in these? I haven't listened).

 

You also do get some different mixes from what I've noticed on Sgt. peppers and White Album. Haven't noticed many differences elsewhere, though Paperback Writer is definitely inferior in mono (in my opinion, of course).

[bobbob1313]

I don't remember these backing vocals in the original version of "Across The Universe."

[Edie]

I have the V0 versions and am thinking about going back for the FLACs.

[bobbob1313]

Oh, let's hear it for Dennis O'Bell.

[bjorn_skurj]

I have the V0 versions and am thinking about going back for the FLACs.

DO IT!!!

[BobLamonta]

So, I think I've got it figured out: disregarding nostalgia, the mono versions are pretty much pointless.

 

I disagree. I'm neither old enough (a mere 31) to remember the original LP releases, nor do I have any audiophillic (not a word) tendencies, but I bought the Mono box set because I've always hated the wide separation of the stereo mixes present in most of their catalog. Even the more sophisticated stereo mixes on Sgt. Pepper and the White Album often have drums and bass crammed into the left channel and lead vocals only on the right. That always made these albums seem dated to me, even though I knew the music itself was timeless.

 

Suffice to say, hearing the mono mixes this week was (cliché alert!) a reintroduction to the band for me. I highly recommend them to anyone who is on the fence. And if you're a headphone-reliant city dweller who can't crank your home stereo (jeers, tiny apartments and social niceties!) and can't listen to music in a car because you don't have one (cheers, mostly reliable subways!) then these mixes are an absolute MUST!

[Sir Stewart]

But I'm listening on headphones, and the mono mixes just sound quieter, duller, and they're in the middle of my head.

Just saying, to me.

[bigideas]

mono pointless?

 

*shocked*j

 

have you read any editorials reviewing the sets or know the history of the recordings?

[Analogman]

Some pretty darn good questions and maybe answers:

 

Controversies Surrounding The Beatles Remasters

 

I am listening to FLAC files of Help, which has long been one of my favorite Beatles albums. My first thought is that is a bit bright sounding.

 

I actually prefer the order of the songs on the US version. (Yes, I know that leaves certain songs out.)

 

I should probably just buy the Capitol boxes.

[Sweet Papa Crimbo]

Quote from that article:

 

 

Michael Jackson died! Woohoo! Bonus!

 

I know that's not how the author intended it, but that passage probably could have been better worded.

 

 

Yeah...'added bonus' probably doesn't convey exactly what he meant.

[bjorn_skurj]

But I'm listening on headphones, and the mono mixes just sound quieter, duller, and they're in the middle of my head.

Just saying, to me.

They did to me, too, then I plugged my iPod into a pair of cheap-shit computer speakers and they sound fantastic.

[Analogman]

I think if someone is not use to listening to mono tracks, then it is just going to sound weird. I would say it is a dead format, but Paul Westerberg put out a mono album a few years ago. So, it it not completely dead.

 

I love stereo as much as the next person, but some things are just meant to be heard in mono. One of my favorite periods of music is the so-called British Invasion era, so even though I am not as old as M Chris, I sort of grew up listening to mono tracks.

 

And as some of those articles have pointed out, people are mostly listening to music by way of Mp3/Mp3 players these days, and don't care about sound quality that much. Or, not as much as they use to, anyhow. When I was a teenager, the bigger the stereo system/speakers you had, the cooler you were. Of course, all of that changed with the emergence of the boom box, and the rise of cassettes over albums. I have to say that the reemergence of vinyl as something younger people want to buy still amazes me. I think if the Beatles re-masters were put out in a vinyl format, they would sell like hot cakes, as they say.

 

I don't have the bread to buy something so expensive, so unless I buy the discs at some point down the road, I will have to be content with snagging a few here and there to check them out.

 

I have to say I am not entirely convinced (yet). Like I (and others) have said before, they should have put both mono and stereo on the same disc. And they should have been re-mastered using the HDCD process.

[junkiesmile]

I agonized over mono vrs. stereo and based my decision on the fact that I prefer Pet Sounds stereo over mono. I like the space that stereo creates. That being said, I just found out that my father-in-law bought the mono set. Sweet trade I think. As far as the ipod debate goes,and I'm sure this is audiophile blasphemy, when I buy a cd the first thing I do is load it into my computer and burn a copy for my car and put the cd up on the rack with the rest of my collection. Most of my listening happens in the car or at work and I'm so paranoid about having my cds stolen out of my car or warped in the heat that I never actually listen to the actual cd. I import and burn at the highest bit rate and my collection stays pristine. So I'm actually hearing the burned remasters compared to the burned previous versions and they are a vast improvement. They sound so warm that they're almost dripping. I'm happy with my purchase. Maybe someday when the kids are older I'll have the luxury of investing in a proper sound system and I'll be blown away again but right now these remasters sound amazing to ears that are used to burned copies of the older versions.

[junkiesmile]

By the way, most of the new vinyl that is being produced these days were recorded digitally and then put on vinyl. I thought the argument was about analog vrs. digital recording. How does this work. How do you change something recorded in ones and zeroes into the "warm" vinyl sound that people are always raving about. Are the young people caught up in the vinyl resurgence being sold a bill of goods?

[Sir Stewart]

mono pointless?

 

*shocked*j

 

have you read any editorials reviewing the sets or know the history of the recordings?

 

Yes and yes and what do either of those things have to do with how it sounds to me?

I mean what you're essentially saying is "How can you not hear how great the mono mixes sound - haven't you read about how great they sound?"

I'm not against these mixes, I just right now don't see the point of having them, personally.

[cryptique]

Obviously you need to go back and read some more.

[Analogman]

Beatlemania Hits Retail As CD Reissues Sell Fast

 

The much-anticipated reissues of the Beatles' catalog hit stores on Sept. 9 are doing brisk business.

 

According to SoundScan's Building Chart data, more than 235,000 albums were purchased in the U.S. on Wednesday (Sept. 9) and Thursday (Sept. 10). The Building Chart's panel of reporters is made up of seven merchants that SoundScan estimates represent more than 70% of all U.S. album sales: Trans World Entertainment, Best Buy, iTunes, Starbucks, Borders, Target and Anderson Merchandisers.

 

That 235,000 figure is a mighty impressive number, considering in the week ending Sept. 6, the band's entire catalog shifted a total of 21,000.

 

"Abbey Road" was the band's bestseller in those two days, shifting 32,000 copies while "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club" was in second-place with 27,000. Next up were "The White Album" (22,000), "Rubber Soul" (21,000), "Help!" (16,000) and "Revolver" (15,000).

 

With those kinds of preliminary figures already racked up, the Beatles will easily overwhelm both Billboard's Top Comprehensive Albums and Top Pop Catalog Albums charts next week. Nielsen SoundScan's sales tracking week runs from Monday through Sunday of each week and Billboard's new album charts will be revealed next Wednesday (Sept. 16).

 

On the Top Pop Catalog Albums chart, it looks like the Beatles will own nine out of the top 10 titles, with only Michael Jackson's resilient "Number Ones" the lone non-Beatles set.

 

Chart watchers note: the two new "Beatles in Stereo" and "Beatles in Mono" boxed sets will chart on the Billboard 200, as the tally houses current and new releases (generally those 18 months old or less). Over on the Top Comprehensive Albums chart, both old and new albums mingle together. Thus, the individual album reissues of the Beatles' catalog will chart on the Top Comprehensive Albums and Top Pop Catalog Albums charts.

 

Record label sources predict that "Abbey Road" could end up selling as much as 100,000 copies by the close of the tracking week on Sunday night, Sept. 13. Those well-trained industry eyeballs also figure "Peppers," "White Album" and "Rubber Soul" may shift anywhere between 45,000 and 60,000.

 

"The Beatles in Stereo" and "The Beatles in Mono" are also selling well, considering their hefty price tags. Industry sources think "Stereo" could sell 25,000 by week's end while the "Mono" offering may do 10,000.

 

Collectively, chart prognosticators think the Beatles catalog of albums may sell between 500,000 and 600,000 by Sunday night.

 

Predicting first-week sales for the Beatles re-issues is more complicated than usual. Because the albums are being sold not just through music retailers, but also in an array stores that don't normally sell music, this throws a wrench into traditional sales projection models. In turn, all of these projections could very well grow to be bigger than expected once the sales week ends.

[anthony]

Chuck Klosterman Repeats The Beatles

 

Hilarious.

[Sir Stewart]

Yeah, that is great. It was posted a couple of pages back.

[Littlebear]

I prefer mono over stereo even with headphones. The thing is that stereo mixes done after the original takes sound mainly artificial with pretty much every band of the sixties prior to original stereo mixes done around the end of this decade.

[Sparky speaks]

This week's Breakfast With the Beatles, mostly mono.....Link.....Buce Spizer's interview is good....

 

http://www.beatlesradioshow.com/thisweek.htm

[Synthesizer Patel]

But I'm listening on headphones, and the mono mixes just sound quieter, duller, and they're in the middle of my head.

Just saying, to me.

 

if the sound went anywhere else it would miss your head entirely. plus, your brain is in the middle of your head - so that seems like the logical place for the sound to want go.

 

all joking aside, i ... hmmm ... actually i give up!

[Synthesizer Patel]

I agonized over mono vrs. stereo and based my decision on the fact that I prefer Pet Sounds stereo over mono. I like the space that stereo creates.

 

i wouldn't compare the pet sounds stereo mix with the beatles stereo mixes. whilst i'd still say pet sounds works best in mono, the stereo version is very well mixed by brian wilson himself, and neither suffers from the panning issues or rushed approach that the beatles albums in stereo suffer from.

[junkiesmile]

i wouldn't compare the pet sounds stereo mix with the beatles stereo mixes. whilst i'd still say pet sounds works best in mono, the stereo version is very well mixed by brian wilson himself, and neither suffers from the panning issues or rushed approach that the beatles albums in stereo suffer from.

Well now that my father-in-law is getting the mono box I'll be able to compare and decide for myself.

[Sir Stewart]

if the sound went anywhere else it would miss your head entirely. plus, your brain is in the middle of your head - so that seems like the logical place for the sound to want go.

 

all joking aside, i ... hmmm ... actually i give up!

 

So you are joking, I guess, but what you're saying is worth answering: hearing everything in the "middle of my head" isn't anywhere near as pleasing as hearing, say, a French horn way up over yonder above me to the far left, or a bassline rumbling along to my right.