Beatles Remastered

[jwinter]

The mono set is very intriguing for sure.... 

Somehow I knew you'd be interested in that one, Bill! 

A serious question:  why would you want them in mono?  Assuming that they're the same takes, why would a mono recording sound better than stereo?  Is it that you find the stereo mix to be unnatural or distorted in some way?   I admit I'm a huge Beatles fan, but I've never done a mono vs stereo comparison on any of their stuff... I would think something like Sgt. Pepper would sound kind of weird in mono.

[drogulus]

A serious question:  why would you want them in mono?  Assuming that they're the same takes, why would a mono recording sound better than stereo?  Is it that you find the stereo mix to be unnatural or distorted in some way?   I admit I'm a huge Beatles fan, but I've never done a mono vs stereo comparison on any of their stuff... I would think something like Sgt. Pepper would sound kind of weird in mono.

     Many of these recordings were originally mixed for mono and the stereo versions are made from a limited number of tracks. They don't really sound like stereo at all. Usually the basic tracks have been "bounced", that is recorded to 3 or 4 track and then mixed down to a single track, with a lead vocal and instrumental track then added. So you only have a mono plus 2 or 3 additional tracks to work with. If stereo had been in mind from the beginning the initial tracks would have been mixed to 2 tracks. You can hear this in many albums made up to about '67(check out Pink Floyd's Piper At The Gates Of Dawn or the first Buffalo Springfield album to hear examples of this "mono plus" technique). After that true stereo became the rule. This half stereo type of production is more bothersome with headphones than speakers.

[George]

A serious question:  why would you want them in mono?  Assuming that they're the same takes, why would a mono recording sound better than stereo?  Is it that you find the stereo mix to be unnatural or distorted in some way?   I admit I'm a huge Beatles fan, but I've never done a mono vs stereo comparison on any of their stuff... I would think something like Sgt. Pepper would sound kind of weird in mono.

Like with early Dylan, the drums and or bass are only on one side for the stereo mix, so you get a bass light sound. Also, like drogulus said, many of these albums were originally mixed for mono and therefore many folks think that they sound "better" in their mono incarnation. Pet Sounds is another album that falls into this category.

[Dr. Dread]

Like with early Dylan, the drums and or bass are only on one side for the stereo mix, so you get a bass light sound. Also, like drogulus said, many of these albums were originally mixed for mono and therefore many folks think that they sound "better" in their mono incarnation. Pet Sounds is another album that falls into this category.

When did the stereo mixes start? Pepper?

[George]

When did the stereo mixes start? Pepper?

I wasn't sure, so I googled. There's no simple answer.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20070603214520AAyDHvg

[Bogey]

A serious question:  why would you want them in mono?  Assuming that they're the same takes, why would a mono recording sound better than stereo?  Is it that you find the stereo mix to be unnatural or distorted in some way?   I admit I'm a huge Beatles fan, but I've never done a mono vs stereo comparison on any of their stuff... I would think something like Sgt. Pepper would sound kind of weird in mono.

What everyone else said JW, but more importantly, for me, I want to hear them as the folks did back in the day (or as close to that as I can get) until I have the resources to grab them on vinyl, which may be never.  I liken it to the difference between a reprint of Avengers #4 (Vol. 1, of course) on new slick and shiny paper and having it reprinted on the old stock, low quality paper.  Though the slick may look nicer, it still does not capture that original look. 

[Bogey]

Some other tid-bits woven in:

Moreover, the group's first seven albums (through "Revolver") include only about 25 minutes of music. The mono and stereo versions of each — collectors prize both because of anomalies like different vocal takes, instrumental lines or effects — could have fit on a single CD with room to spare. In many cases, the contemporaneous singles could have fit as well, making the "Past Masters" set superfluous.

The mono boxed set, in fact, demonstrates this. Because the stereo CDs will include George Martin's 1987 remixes of "Help!" and "Rubber Soul" — mixes that have been the subject of much criticism and debate among Beatles fanatics — the mono CDs of those albums will include both the mono and the original 1965 stereo mixes of those albums.

Those are, however, available only in the mono boxed set, which includes the 10 albums (through "The Beatles," popularly known as the "White Album") that were mixed separately for mono and stereo in the '60s, as well as a mono equivalent of "Past Masters." (An 11th album, "Yellow Submarine," was also released in mono, but the mono version was just a folded-down version of the stereo mix.) The stereo boxed set has a minor attraction as well: the documentaries included on the individual discs are offered here on a separate DVD, a format many collectors will prefer. An Apple Corps spokesman said that prices were not yet available.

[jwinter]

Fascinating, thanks for the replies!  Sounds like I may need to consider both options, depending on how pricey they are...

[drogulus]

Like with early Dylan, the drums and or bass are only on one side for the stereo mix, so you get a bass light sound. Also, like drogulus said, many of these albums were originally mixed for mono and therefore many folks think that they sound "better" in their mono incarnation. Pet Sounds is another album that falls into this category.

    Pet Sounds doesn't suffer from the early stereo problems. It sounds great to me. The preference for mono Beach Boys probably goes back to Brian Wilson. He preferred the mono mixes, though that may have been because he is partially deaf in one ear and probably can't hear stereo well.

[George]

    Pet Sounds doesn't suffer from the early stereo problems. It sounds great to me. The preference for mono Beach Boys probably goes back to Brian Wilson. He preferred the mono mixes, though that may have been because he is partially deaf in one ear and probably can't hear stereo well.

In the case of Pet Sounds, I definitely prefer the stereo.

[mwb]

The mono set is very intriguing for sure.  Any notes on the cost yet?  Too bad they are not being released by Brilliant!

Yes.  I'm really curious about the cost of both sets.  I'm intrigued and eager for good re-mastering (but rarely optimistic about such things.)   

I'm actually hoping this will open things to us seeing them for legal digital download purchasing too, which would probably interest me even more.

[George]

I've read small bits of the sh.tv thread that is already well over 1,000 posts in 24 hours, and it's stated that only five out of 525 minutes of music have NR applied, which is probably not so bad.  "Making them louder" sounds very ominous though, and it's also mentioned in the sh.tv thread that some compression has been applied.  I already figure I'll be sticking with the current CDs.

Just curious if you still have the same opinion, Russ.

I am very curious about the mono set, but I could just be buying into the hype. 

[Bogey]

Just curious if you still have the same opinion, Russ.

I am very curious about the mono set, but I could just be buying into the hype. 

Well, here is some recent info on the mono set:

http://www.musicbyday.com/the-beatles-mono-box-set/490/

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B002BSHXJA?tag=zibblu-20&camp=213381&creative=390973&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=B002BSHXJA&adid=1F6S0YW47BMRZA3PQ2CG&

At thsi price, I may have to pass....$230 can buy a lot of music at my end....maybe it will come down and there will be a more affordable release or download (even I would be happy with this).  I begin tire of paying for limited edition box art that is way over priced.  A nice pro copy is one thing, but this is out of hand.

[DavidW]

Thanks for the link Bill, it brought it too my attention.  I've been waiting for a reasonable box set of any form.  I'm not hot on the stereo mixes, but my big issue is the pricing.  The mono set is pricey and a limited run, but there's also a stereo set and not a limited run. 

The stereo set will be a good deal, not at release date, but things that are actually popular quickly drop in price on the marketprice.  By October it will probably be $150 used, after x-mas easily $100 and then it's hit the right price for me.

I've been waiting for all of the albums to be carefully remastered and released at a better price point, this looks to be what I've been waiting for.

[Bogey]

Thanks for the link Bill, it brought it too my attention.  I've been waiting for a reasonable box set of any form.  I'm not hot on the stereo mixes, but my big issue is the pricing.  The mono set is pricey and a limited run, but there's also a stereo set and not a limited run. 

The stereo set will be a good deal, not at release date, but things that are actually popular quickly drop in price on the marketprice.  By October it will probably be $150 used, after x-mas easily $100 and then it's hit the right price for me.

I've been waiting for all of the albums to be carefully remastered and released at a better price point, this looks to be what I've been waiting for.

Excellent!  I have everything in stereo, and just wanted the mono.  It may or may not happen now.  Oh well, plenty of other music out there....plenty.  Heck, if I am going to drop that kind of cash, I believe the Harnoncourt/Leohardt Bach Cantata set would take precedent.

[DavidW]

Excellent!  I have everything in stereo, and just wanted the mono.  It may or may not happen now.  Oh well, plenty of other music out there....plenty.  Heck, if I am going to drop that kind of cash, I believe the Harnoncourt/Leohardt Bach Cantata set would take precedent.

That's funny you mentioned that because I was listening to a couple of the secular cantatas from their secular cantata set last night.  Well the cd I was listening to was all Koopman.  In fact Koopman and the Amsterdam Baroque Orchestra appear the most in that set, Harnoncourt the least.

[George]

Well, here is some recent info on the mono set:

http://www.musicbyday.com/the-beatles-mono-box-set/490/

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B002BSHXJA?tag=zibblu-20&camp=213381&creative=390973&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=B002BSHXJA&adid=1F6S0YW47BMRZA3PQ2CG&

At thsi price, I may have to pass....$230 can buy a lot of music at my end....

I hear ya. Thanks for the links.

That mono box, like the third disc from the most recent Dylan Bootleg Series, is gonna make a helluva torrent. 

[DavidW]

Well the mono recordings have been available in lossless on the torrents for awhile.

Pirates-- showing the industry how it's SUPPOSED to be done.

[George]

Well the mono recordings have been available in lossless on the torrents for awhile.

Other than the UK Parlophones by a select few Demonoid members (pbthal comes to mind) I wasn't too impressed. I tried the Purple Chick, Ebbets and Red Wax. 

The mono stuff in the recent box set of singles (forget what it was called) can't touch the sound on those Parlophone UK needledrops. The irony is that by making them sound "better" they always sound worse to me.

[DavidW]

Other than the UK Parlophones

Yuppers...

The irony is that by making them sound "better" they always sound worse to me.

Especially when they do a bad stereo mix!

It reminds me of Star Wars: just give it us in the way that it was originally experienced thank you very much!