Oh my...there goes $239.99 (Beatles mono box)
- Thread starter mjp
- Start date
chronic
old and in the way
No. The new ones were remixed and remastered from the original source tapes (I'm guessing that most were probably 4-track?). They're true stereo. All earlier stereo releases (except for the later albums that were originally issued in stereo) were "fake" stereo. That's why the mono mixes were (and still are) truer to the original intended sound of the recordings and also why so many people hated the earlier stereo releases.
Bukfan
"The law is wrong; I am right"
So, the new ones are true stereo (I bought a bunch of those), but what about the old CD's? Were they true stereo too?
I can't hear much difference between the old and the new CD's, except the new ones are louder and seems to have a "cleaner" sound.
I can't hear much difference between the old and the new CD's, except the new ones are louder and seems to have a "cleaner" sound.
Last edited by a moderator:
mjp
Founding member
Well, true stereo...fake stereo, I guess it's semantics when it comes to CD releases.
The stereo CDs are not always the same mixes between old CDs and new (or LPs). It gets very confusing, really.
George Martin remixed Help! and Rubber Soul when the albums were first released on CD in 1987. Even though Rubber Soul was recorded on a four-track machine, most of its songs have that unlistenable mid-60s STEREO separation with vocals on one side and instruments on the other. Martin remixed the album to bring the vocals down the center. The new stereo remasters use the 1987 George Martin stereo mixes rather than the original 1965 mixes (the original 1965 stereo mixes are in the mono box).
Confused?
From the always accurate and never wrong wikipedia:
The Mono Box Set was released to reflect the fact that the Beatles' catalogue (aside from Yellow Submarine, Abbey Road, and Let It Be) was originally released in mono, in addition to stereo. Many feel that the these mono mixes reflect the true intention of the band. For example, in the case of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, all the mono mixes were done together with the Beatles themselves, throughout the recording of the album, whereas the stereo mixes were done in only six days by George Martin, Geoff Emerick and Richard Lush after the album had been finished, with none of the Beatles attending. George Harrison commented:
For me, that last quote there sums it all up. The Beatles, for the most part, are a pre-stereo band, and that's how they should be heard.
The stereo CDs are not always the same mixes between old CDs and new (or LPs). It gets very confusing, really.
George Martin remixed Help! and Rubber Soul when the albums were first released on CD in 1987. Even though Rubber Soul was recorded on a four-track machine, most of its songs have that unlistenable mid-60s STEREO separation with vocals on one side and instruments on the other. Martin remixed the album to bring the vocals down the center. The new stereo remasters use the 1987 George Martin stereo mixes rather than the original 1965 mixes (the original 1965 stereo mixes are in the mono box).
Confused?
From the always accurate and never wrong wikipedia:
The Mono Box Set was released to reflect the fact that the Beatles' catalogue (aside from Yellow Submarine, Abbey Road, and Let It Be) was originally released in mono, in addition to stereo. Many feel that the these mono mixes reflect the true intention of the band. For example, in the case of Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band, all the mono mixes were done together with the Beatles themselves, throughout the recording of the album, whereas the stereo mixes were done in only six days by George Martin, Geoff Emerick and Richard Lush after the album had been finished, with none of the Beatles attending. George Harrison commented:
"At that time [...] the console was about this big with four faders on it. And there was one speaker right in the middle [...] and that was it. When they invented stereo, I remember thinking 'Why? What do you want two speakers for?', because it ruined the sound from our point of view. You know, we had everything coming out of one speaker; now it had to come out of two speakers. It sounded like...very...naked."
For me, that last quote there sums it all up. The Beatles, for the most part, are a pre-stereo band, and that's how they should be heard.
Bukfan
"The law is wrong; I am right"
I see! So, the new remastered CD's are the same as the 1987 stereo mixes, only they have been remastered so they sound louder and "cleaner". So there's not a huge difference between the 1987 Cd's and the 2010 Cd's, I guess.
What about the "White Album"? wasn't that released in stereo too, just like Abbey Road and Let It Be?
I agree! I just wish they would sell the mono albums individually. I would love to hear Sgt. Pepper in mono!
Last edited by a moderator:
The distinction is that Yellow Submarine, Abbey Road and Let it Be have only been released in stereo. All of the rest were released in both mono and some bastardized form of stereo.
mjp
Founding member
That album is interesting because it was originally released in mono in England and stereo in the U.S. Maybe there were more stereos in the U.S. at the time. I think most Brits were still using steam powered Victrolas up until the mid-80s...
Last edited:
William S. Burg has one of those.
Bukfan
"The law is wrong; I am right"
If you think that's weird, it's just the tip of the iceberg. Given that Capitol had the rights to the recordings and hence releases, in many countries other than the UK, Europe, Australia and Asia, there are a good number of recordings all over the world that are done with different takes, at different speeds, with different overdubs. Couple this with Parlophone/EMI having their own distribution inconsistencies (albeit considerably more consistent than the Capitol issues), there are dozens of songs that exist in at least 8 or 10 different versions thanks to stereo/mono, remastered/not remastered, Capitol/EMI, re-mixing for release in Mexico, re-mixing for release in Italy...on and on and on. Some of the differences are small, but some are more substantial.
As an example, the remastered set does not include the U.S. version of I'm Looking Through You, which has a double false-start intro. To find that, you'd need to find a U.S. pressing of the LP or the Capitol CD Issues of their butchered albums. Yeah, by the way, there's no way that the Butcher Cover was not a message to Capitol. True, the photo shoot was never intended as being for an album cover (which is the "proof" offered as to why the cover wasn't a commentary), but that doesn't preclude someone seeing it and thinking, hmmm.
As an example, the remastered set does not include the U.S. version of I'm Looking Through You, which has a double false-start intro. To find that, you'd need to find a U.S. pressing of the LP or the Capitol CD Issues of their butchered albums. Yeah, by the way, there's no way that the Butcher Cover was not a message to Capitol. True, the photo shoot was never intended as being for an album cover (which is the "proof" offered as to why the cover wasn't a commentary), but that doesn't preclude someone seeing it and thinking, hmmm.
Bukfan
"The law is wrong; I am right"
Good grief, PS! It must be hell to be a Beatles record collector with all those different versions out there, if you want a complete collection. What a mess!
I just had a look at the Butcher Cover on the net. Funny, but I've never seen it before (probably because it's a U.S. cover).
That's some cover! I hope Capitol got the message.
I just had a look at the Butcher Cover on the net. Funny, but I've never seen it before (probably because it's a U.S. cover).
That's some cover! I hope Capitol got the message.
Last edited by a moderator:
chronic
old and in the way
The butcher cover was recalled on the first day of sales. Not many made it into private hands before they were pasted over with the new cover art. It's one of the priciest Beatles collectibles out there... especially if it was never glued over.
I have flacs of a Canadian W I D E S T E R E O pressing of With The Beatles. Here's an mp3 sample from that album.
I have flacs of a Canadian W I D E S T E R E O pressing of With The Beatles. Here's an mp3 sample from that album.
Perhaps it's just a coincidence (I doubt it), but after Revolver (of which Yesterday...and Today was more or less a contemporary), all of the the Beatles UK albums were released in the US with the same track listing.
"Exceptions," that aren't really exceptions, include Magical Mystery Tour, which was only an EP in the UK - in the U.S. it was a full album, including some UK/US singles; and The Beatles Again, which came out around the time of Let it Be and included single releases, none of which were on U.S. Capitol album releases. You might think that Can't Buy Me Love and I Should Have Known Better were released on a U.S. Beatle album, and you'd be correct. They were on the original soundtrack to A Hard Day's Night, but that was put out by United Artists, not Capitol. And unlike the UK release of A Hard Day's Night, the UA release was only partially Bealte songs; the rest was incidental music from the film by George Martin.
"Exceptions," that aren't really exceptions, include Magical Mystery Tour, which was only an EP in the UK - in the U.S. it was a full album, including some UK/US singles; and The Beatles Again, which came out around the time of Let it Be and included single releases, none of which were on U.S. Capitol album releases. You might think that Can't Buy Me Love and I Should Have Known Better were released on a U.S. Beatle album, and you'd be correct. They were on the original soundtrack to A Hard Day's Night, but that was put out by United Artists, not Capitol. And unlike the UK release of A Hard Day's Night, the UA release was only partially Bealte songs; the rest was incidental music from the film by George Martin.
mjp
Founding member
It's hard to believe anyone ever did that and said, "Sounds good, press it!"
chronic
old and in the way
I guess stereo was still enough of a novelty at the time that the more extreme they could make the separation the better. On this there's almost no crossover between the channels and it leaves the center sounding dead.
But look at it this way... if you adjust the balance to the left speaker, it's just like karaoke.
But look at it this way... if you adjust the balance to the left speaker, it's just like karaoke.
nervas
more crickets than friends
Well forget stereo or mono, how about the beatles revolver on metal CD for $499.00!
Now there's something I did not know? I'm sure some of you are aware of this(if the description is true?) CD's were originally made on metal? That's all fine and dandy, but $500.00? I guess it's rare, though no different sound from the cds not on metal. Still it makes me want to go look at all the first cd's I ever bought and see if any are made out of metal?
Now there's something I did not know? I'm sure some of you are aware of this(if the description is true?) CD's were originally made on metal? That's all fine and dandy, but $500.00? I guess it's rare, though no different sound from the cds not on metal. Still it makes me want to go look at all the first cd's I ever bought and see if any are made out of metal?
nervas
more crickets than friends
Yeah, I certainly had never heard of this. Funny you mention that bukfan, the sellers says "When CD's first came on the market in the 1980's they were made to be indestructible, the recording industry even claimed you could drive over one and it would still play."
Just as funny, I bet I could run over any CD I have once, and it would still play. That is unless it cracked, but I don't think it would.
mjp, the seller calls it a 1st PRESS? Funny to hear that term used to describe a CD. The description certainly makes it sound like this was the regular CD issued at the time? Yup, probably too much crack!
And CD's were not metal in the 80's? What about RATT, MOTLEY CRUE, WHITESNAKE! haahhahha, just kidding! Plus I think all those bands I just mentioned were glam/cock rock! Ok, what about, ah, oh Judas Priest!
Last edited by a moderator:
mjp
Founding member
mjp
Founding member
The news has hit the people who have been sitting on copies of the original release, and now they are showing up on eBay in a last ditch attempt to squeeze $300 or $400 out of them before the re-release drops. I think they'll end up unloading them for closer to $150 eventually. But I'm not really concerned with a number written on a box. They can keep the limited edition. The re-release is exactly the same, but without a number.
nervas
more crickets than friends
I didn't even remember the original having a number. I just spent 10 minutes looking for a number and finally found it. It's not even on the box, or any of the discs. The original, as I'm sure the re-release does, came with a Down on the Street single on a seperate CD. So anyway, the number is on the back bottom right of that. I'd gladly save a couple hundred and skip that number.
I also remember thinking the Beatles Mono Box was supposed to be numbered and it wasn't, but still overjoyed with my purchase.
I also remember thinking the Beatles Mono Box was supposed to be numbered and it wasn't, but still overjoyed with my purchase.
mjp
Founding member
Wow. That makes it so...special.
A lot of people (okay, not people, collectors) seem to get very angry when a limited whatever is re-issued. I suppose the thrill of being one of only 6 people to have something is ruined and you're just a little bit less special when all is said and done. Tragic.
mjp
Founding member
For anyone who has been waiting, the mono box is down to $129(!) on Amazon.
Apparently Apple has finally decided to release The Beatles catalog on iTunes, so I suppose they expect that to have a negative impact on disc sales. But will the mono discs be on iTunes? I have to doubt it. But who knows.
And here's a man of science explaining why mono is better.
Apparently Apple has finally decided to release The Beatles catalog on iTunes, so I suppose they expect that to have a negative impact on disc sales. But will the mono discs be on iTunes? I have to doubt it. But who knows.
And here's a man of science explaining why mono is better.
Gerard K H Love
Appreciate your friends
I'm sticking with MONO!
nervas
more crickets than friends
The whole iTunes thing, and how EVERYONE seemed to be waiting for the Beatles to finally be released... I never understood? I can't imagine any true beatles fan, running online to buy the songs they've owned for years and years? I have a decent sized beatles collection on vinyl and cd and was excited about buying the latest mono cd set. But with iTunes I don't know what the big fuss was about, beyond them hoping this introduces the beatles to a new generation?