The 1987 CD mixes
In 1987, as the Beatles catalog was due for their first CD release, producer George Martin wanted to go back and remix the sixties version of stereo to something a bit more updated for the modern ear. Because of a rushed release schedule, he couldn’t do this for the first four albums, Please Please Me, With The Beatles, Beatles For Sale and A Hard Day’s Night, as they were due for release in February 1987. So, as a compromise, they were released in mono, which were mixes the producer was satisfied with.
The next batch of releases were Help!, Rubber Soul and Revolver, due out in April 1987, and this time, Sir George had time to prepare updated mixes for these. He had a listen, and while he thought Help! and Rubber Soul needed remixing, he was satisfied with the sixties stereo mix of Revolver and all the albums that followed.
So he remixed Help! and Rubber Soul, and when they were released on CD they had an “eighties” stereo soundscape. (Except for some Canadian pressings of these CD’s where the original sixties stereo mixes had been used by mistake.)
Over the years, Beatles fans and music lovers have been rather critical to the 1987 mixes of those two albums, especially because they brought in an amount of echo and reverb which hadn’t been present on the sixties stereo mixes. Then, when the remasters were announced, these fans were shocked that they were once again to use these inferior 1987 remixes for the general release of the remastered catalog (albums available individually and as part of the stereo remasters boxed set).
In a telephone interview that Detroit’s Classic Rock station’s (FM 94,7) Deminski and Doyle conducted with Giles Martin, son of Sir George, the producer unexpectedly was able to shed some light on why the eighties mix was re-used.
Deminski and Doyle had made several erraneous assumptions, first of all they thought that Giles was involved in the remasters project, secondly they assumed that the remasters were also remixed, not just remastered. As these assumptions were both untrue, the interview do provide an insight into the narrow world behind the walls of Abbey Road studios and the hap-hazard manner in which things happen.
Giles Martin was in the studio, remixing the Beatles songs that were going to be used in the The Beatles:Rock Band game, singling out specific instruments from otherwise interlocked studio tapes, so he was able to talk a bit about that process.
But he was also involved in the “Love” project, and he was an insider at Abbey Road, so he was also able to listen in to the remasters project that was going on at the same time as he was mixing for RockBand. Here’s what he said (transcribed by me from the podcast of the interview) about those infamous 1987 remixes:
Giles Martin: Rubber Soul and Help! were remixed by my dad in 1988 or ’87 for CD. And when we did “Love”, we got to do Yesterday, and I couldn’t understand why there were so much echo and reverb on the voice ’cause it was very non-Beatles. And it was only when I came back and I was listening to the remasters I asked “how come this is the case?” and they said “well we are remastering the eighties versions of [Rubber Soul and Help!]” and I said “why aren’t we remastering the originals, we should remaster what came out then [in 1965]?”
And they said “Well, your father wouldn’t be very happy with us not remastering the versions he did in the eighties.”
So I spoke to my Dad and I asked “Do you mind if they remaster the sixties version?” and he went “I don’t even remember doing them in the eighties!”
Allan Rouse in an interview with Record Collector: “The remasters were based on the master-tapes, with the exception of two albums: George Martin’s 1987 mixes of Help! and Rubber Soul. People are questioning why we used those. George Martin is the fifth Beatle. He chose to do it. You can argue with him, but I’m not going to.”
So there you have it! The stereo remasters are the 1987 remixes out of the involved remastering engineers’ misguided respect for Sir George!
Now, the original 1965 stereo mixes are not lost to the world, because they are an added bonus on the mono remasters of those albums, but these are only part of the mono boxed set, and are not for sale to the general public as individual albums.
Source: https://webgrafikk.com/blog/uncategorized/1987-cd-mixes/
Beatles 1987 vs 2009 Stereo CDs - which do you prefer?
I'm in the camp that prefers the 1987 CDs.
Besides my preference for the more neutral EQ of the 1987s over the more bassy 2009s, there's an issue of historical accuracy when it comes to the 2009s (and not just the stereo, but the mono ones too)
On multiple occasions, the 2009 remasters actually removed certain sounds that were present on the original releases. Most often these are lip smacks and plosives, but the sound of a guitar's pickup switch was even edited out of I Want You (She's So Heavy), along with some mic distortion on John's voice during the long "yeeeaaaaaahhhhhhh!" part.
If you want to hear a particularly egregious edit, listen to the strange, digital sounding "p" sound in the first "appear" of I'm A Loser. This was an attempt by the 2009s to edit out a plosive which wasn't even bad sounding to begin with (the original can be heard on the 1987 Beatles For Sale CD as well as The Capitol Albums Vol. 1 CD set), and the end result is far worse than the original "error" in my opinion.
A crucial lip smack in my book comes before the vocals start in You Won't See Me: it totally adds to the sass of the lyrics in my opinion, and after getting used to hearing it (as well as others throughout the song) on the 80s CD, I find it difficult to listen to the sanitized 2009 remaster.
On top of this, there are a few songs on the 2009 stereo remasters that sound worse than previous CD versions. For one, She Said She Said had the treble sucked out of it in the '09, making it sound muffled in comparison to the 80s CD. Also, the beginning of A Hard Day's Night has a weird shift in EQ that wasn't present on the 90s Red Album CD release. The final one that I know of is Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand, which sounds much clearer on the aforementioned Capitol Albums Vol. 1 set (the 2009 also edited out some studio dialogue in the right ear at the beginning of the song!)
TLDR: The 2009 remasters are missing Beatles ASMR that was present on the original vinyl as well as the 1987 CDs. Some songs also sound objectively worse on the 2009 stereo remasters compared to previous CD versions.
From Al Lopez-https://www.reddit.com/r/beatles/comments/v031td/beatles_1987_vs_2009_stereo_cds_which_do_you/?rdt=48026
BEATLES ON CD: YEAH, YEAH, NAH
03-08-1987, from the New York Times
03-08-1987, from the New York Times
The resonance of that decision remains with us to this day, for while Beatlemania may be more subdued than it was in the 1960's, a remnant of it has remained alive through the 17 years since the group disbanded. Right now it's having one of its periodic waves of high visibility, and that has traditionally meant that there's money to be made for those with Beatles trinkets to sell. This year's hot items aren't Beatles lunchboxes, wallpaper or gum cards, but rather, increasingly high-tech ways of collecting the band's work.
Ten days ago, EMI released the first four Beatles albums on compact disk. These CD transfers have been a long time coming, but have they been worth the wait? In a general sense, yes: they put forth a crisp, powerful and beautifully detailed sound, but they're also short - less than 35 minutes each - and they're in mono. These aspects and several others leave one wondering whether the label's Beatles CD program ought to be reconsidered.
Meanwhile, there has been other Beatles activity. Two weeks ago, for instance, ''Help!'' was released on video tape (with a full stereo soundtrack), joining the already available home video versions of ''A Hard Day's Night,'' ''Magical Mystery Tour'' and ''Let It Be.'' A laser video disk of ''Help!'' featuring segments deleted from the theatrical version is forthcoming, as is ''The Making of 'A Hard Day's Night,' '' a video documentary also featuring footage previously seen only by the most obsessive collectors. Beatles cartoons are back on TV. And two documentaries marking the 20th anniversary this June of ''Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band'' are in the works.
Say what you like about Elvis Presley, the Rolling Stones, Bob Dylan, the Police or Bruce Springsteen, no performer of the rock era has had anything like the social and cultural impact the Beatles had, nor has any pop ensemble produced so consistently brilliant, influential, varied and durable a body of work. Between their first EMI recording session, on Sept. 4, 1962, and their last, on Jan. 3, 1970, the Beatles recorded and released 211 songs, or nearly 10 hours of music.
The four new CD's, which use the cover art, liner notes, track orders and even the Parlophone logo of the British originals, are ''Please Please Me'' (CDP 7 46435), ''With the Beatles'' (CDP 7 46436), ''A Hard Day's Night'' (CDP 7 45437) and ''Beatles For Sale'' (CDP 7 46438) - a chronological sequence that takes the band's album releases through the end of 1964. According to EMI's plan, ''Help!,'' ''Rubber Soul'' and ''Revolver'' will be released in April. June will bring ''Sgt. Pepper,'' and by the end of the year, ''The Beatles (White Album),'' ''Yellow Submarine,'' ''Abbey Road'' and ''Let It Be'' will be out too. That covers the 174 tracks that were originally issued on LP. Missing, however, will be the 37 songs (plus four alternate takes) released as singles and EP tracks -in other words, most of the group's biggest hits. These, or some of them, will be issued next year in a compilation that EMI has not yet formulated.
On the four CD's just issued, the sound is magnificent - solid, crystal clear, beautifully textured and fully detailed. One hears very little in the way of tape hiss or extraneous noise; heard side by side with their equivalent mono Parlophone LP's, the CD's sound, for the most part, as bright or brighter on top, and a good deal richer in the bass.
Moreover, the domestic release of these British disks also redresses a longstanding flaw in the Beatles' American discography -the fact that until ''Sgt. Pepper'' the Beatles' American disks bore very little resemblance to those the group and George Martin carefully constructed at the Abbey Road studio in London. Typically, a run of Beatles sessions would produce about 16 tracks, two of which were issued as a single, while 14 were sequenced for the LP - the group's rather considerate philosophy being that someone who bought the single shouldn't have to pay for the same tracks on an album. Often, a second single was issued between two LP's, so that every six months or so, the Beatles would have released 16 to 18 tracks.
When these recordings were sent to Capitol, EMI's American arm, however, they were promptly dismantled and made to conform to a set of house rules. First, it was Capitol's policy that an LP contain no more than 12 selections; so two were dropped from the British album sequence right off the top. Second, it was felt that songs released as singles should appear on LP's, so more album tracks were dropped to make room for the latest of the 45's. Finally, it was decreed that American record buyers expected a brighter, hotter kind of sound than their British counterparts, so the tapes were lavishly immersed in artificial echo. So, for every three British LP's, Capitol sold the American public four shorter and sonically murkier albums.
Don’t Look Now, but Kidz Boppers Have Graduated From College
But while the CD's offer the original sequencings and sound quality, they raise other questions that bear examination. From the campaign EMI has been building around these disks, it strikes me that a number of questionable decisions were made, both in terms of the Beatles CD program on the whole, and with regard to these first disks.
For instance, the fact that these first four CD's have been issued in mono is bound to bother some collectors. In the case of ''Please Please Me'' and ''With the Beatles,'' that's certainly a defensible approach, for when they were recorded, in 1963, George Martin had only two-track equipment at his disposal. At the sessions, he recorded the instruments on one channel and the vocals on the other - an arrangement he found convenient in producing a mono mix, but awkward for stereo.
Without question, the mono mixes pack a greater punch. What the stereo versions (instruments on the left, vocals on the right) have going for them, though, is that they allow one to peer freely into the details of the arrangements - a fascinating pursuit if one's interest in the Beatles is musical rather than nostalgic.
But ''A Hard Day's Night'' and ''Beatles for Sale'' were recorded on four-track equipment, and their stereo mixes are bright, spacious and really quite lovely. Why mono CD's then? Bhaskar Menon, chairman of EMI Music Worldwide, recently explained that ''in very close discussion with George Martin, we determined that there was no question we must preserve the original mixes - that the releases really must be in mono because stereo was not the intent of the performers.''
But George Martin tells it this way: ''Expediency, in a word,'' he said. ''EMI did not consult me until December, by which time they were ready to have the disks pressed. When I heard the stereo CD's, I thought they sounded awful. I told them that the first two should go out in mono, and that if they had to issue the others in stereo, the mixes should be cleaned up and re-equalized for CD. Unfortunately, there was a deadline to be met, so they said, 'Look, we'll release all four in mono, and if you like, perhaps you can prepare stereo mixes for ''A Hard Day's Night'' and ''Beatles for Sale'' later on.' ''
Far be it from me to disparage the mono mixes. From ''Please Please Me'' through ''Yellow Submarine,'' each of the Beatles albums was simultaneously issued in both mono and stereo, and one of the great joys of Beatles collecting is that moment when you realize that, in quite a few cases, these separately prepared mixes feature either alternate vocal takes, radically different instrumental balances, or, in the later recordings, different sorts of effects. ''We tended to change our minds a lot,'' Mr. Martin explained, ''mainly because we didn't think it was that important to be consistent. Of course, history has found us out.''
In some cases, the mono mixes are clearly more interesting, particularly on the later albums. On the mono ''Sgt. Pepper,'' for instance, John Lennon's vocal in ''Lucy in the Sky'' is set in a spacey, echoic haze, perfectly appropriate for the song, but lost in the stereo mix. On the same disk, ''She's Leaving Home'' is speeded up in mono, changing the pitch, and that version doesn't drag nearly as much as the stereo one. And on the ''White Album'' (which was released in mono in England, but only in stereo here) about half the tracks boast fascinating mixing variations.
In fact, what's objectionable about EMI's campaign is not the use of the mono tapes, but the company's trumpeting of its claim that ''these are the first four British albums, in their original mono mixes'' - as if the British stereo mixes were less original. It's a murky topic, though. When the question of the original mixes was raised, EMI's London-based spokesman said, ''The first two albums were issued only in mono in 1963. It was not until 1964 or 1965 that they were remixed for stereo.''
Yet, a check of Parlophone's 1963 advertisements for these disks, when they were newly released, confirms that they were indeed issued in both stereo and mono. ''I can't understand that,'' George Martin said when this was pointed out. ''Certainly, I didn't mix them in stereo, nor did the Beatles, and I don't think I was aware that they were out in stereo at the time. Now, that may sound extraordinary to you, but in 1963, I scarcely had time to eat breakfast, let alone keep up with what EMI was releasing.'' That would account for only the first two disks. But if the main reason the others are in mono is that EMI didn't have the time to make the stereo disk properly, must the label coerce history into supporting its last-minute decision?
Having been invited, belatedly, to participate in the CD preparations, Mr. Martin is now in the process of remixing ''Help!,'' ''Rubber Soul'' and ''Revolver'' from the four-track masters. ''My intention was not to change anything,'' he explains, ''but the original mixes sounded a little woolly to me, so I was able to harden up the sound and cut down on some background noise.'' Mr. Martin says, however, that the last few disks in the series - from ''Sgt. Pepper'' onward - will probably not be remixed.
The best solution, of course, would have been to include both the stereo and mono mixes of each album on each CD, and let the listeners decide for themselves. There's lots of room: these four disks run a bit over 30 minutes apiece, and most of the pre-''Pepper'' disks are similarly brief.
Alternatively, EMI could have added, at the end of each CD, the singles and EP tracks that were issued concurrently, with a suitable addendum at the end of the program notes booklet. For that matter, while reprinting the original liner notes was a nice (and, from a collector's point of view, necessary) touch, a supplementary essay setting forth recording and release dates, and discussing the music in the context of the band's full output, should not have been too much to expect at this point.
Finally, it seems silly to stand on ceremony about the ''original 12'' British albums in every case. Is it really sensible to skip a unified compilation like ''Magical Mystery Tour'' simply because it wasn't originally issued on LP, while a CD version of ''Yellow Submarine''- an album containing one track from a previous disk, five otherwise untransferred Beatles tunes and a side of incidental film music - is imminent? Both would fit on a single (and chronologically appropriate) CD.
During the four years between the arrival of CD and the release of these disks, Beatles collectors wondered how EMI would present the Beatles on CD. Unfortunately, EMI seems to have devoted less thought to its CD program than many of the disks' prospective buyers have.
The transfers are fine, and the music is as exhilarating as ever. But as has often been the case, one gets the impression that EMI is intent on providing the minimum and feigning authenticity, largely because its executives haven't properly thought the series through. It's a pity, really, because with a little effort, EMI could have lived up to the advance fanfare for these CD's, and made the series something special. Perhaps it's not too late.
A version of this article appears in print on March 8, 1987, Section 2, Page 25 of the National edition with the headline: BEATLES ON CD: YEAH, YEAH, NAH. Order Reprints | Today’s Paper | Subscribe
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/1987/03/08/arts/beatles-on-cd-yeah-yeah-nah.html
The Beatles Remasters- The Stereo Albums and The Beatles In Mono -from The Absolute Sound, by Neil Gader Sep 11, 2009
The year was 1987 and digital audio was still emerging unsteadily from its technological stone-age. The year was also noteworthy for the highly anticipated, first-ever release of the Beatles catalog on compact disc. Although the transfers were engineered under the watchful eye of the Beatles longtime producer George Martin the discs were met with a collective sigh of dismay and reinforced the view that digital sound wasn’t ready for primetime. Dry and brittle, flat and cold–it was as some would argue, perversely soulless. Most audiophiles scurried back to the safety of their turntables and treasure trove of Beatles vinyl, the early EMI/Parlophones, the later Japanese pressings and the 1982 Mobile Fidelity Beatles Box.
Twenty-two years later, EMI/Apple Records has taken another stab at setting the record straight by releasing the fully remastered Beatles catalog. But this time they have hit the mark. Housed in a pair of shining CD box sets they are a sonic triumph that have, more or less, completely avoided the pitfalls of their predecessor’s dubious past–even if they’re almost pre-destined not to please all comers. Certainly analog loyalists with the toniest turntable rigs will nitpick these discs to death. But the newfound energy, detail and transparency these remasters embody are a quantum leap from 1987. And for the legions of younger listeners without the benefit of the best Beatles vinyl these discs will be nothing short of a revelation.
Released as two individually distributed box CD sets–a stereo collection and The Beatles in Mono– the former includes the 13 core UK albums plus Past Masters Volume I and II compiled on one disc.Individual albums are housed in glossy eco-friendly DigiPacks and feature the original cover art with insightful historical and recording notes by producer and documentarian Kevin Howlett . Each stereo disc also contains a QuickTime mini-doc depicting the making of each album. The box includes a bonus DVD compilation of these non-controversial “Anthology-lite” videos as well.
.jpg)
Although the stereo albums are available individually, not so for the mono recordings (pictured above). They’ll be restricted to the box set and include all 10 titles plus the Mono Masters and alas, no mini-docs. But as a bonus the mono “Help” and “Rubber Soul” disc will include the original 1965 stereo mixes which had not been previously released on CD. Said to be targeted at collectors EMI will limit the run to 10,000 units. Why mono? The Beatles’ albums were recorded during the transitional era of mono to stereo and all but their final pair of records, Abbey Road and Let It Be were mixed to mono. More importantly only the monos were mixed with the Fab Four present in the control room. For many this distinction alone makes the mono set the more accurate barometer of the band’s intent. Generally, the overall packaging of individual discs is well done, but the slip cases hinder easy access and are hardly posh. Sensing an opportunity, a company is marketing its own storage solution; check out The Beatles Box of Vision in a separate blog)
The remastering project was led by veteran Abbey Road project coordinator Allan Rouse, engineer Guy Massey and audio restoration engineer Simon Gibson and spanned a period of four years. Exhaustive research and listening tests were conducted prior to committing the original EMI 811 analogue master tapes to the digital medium. Even the earliest UK vinyl pressings were on hand for comparison. Working song-by-song from vintage Studer tape machines, the state-of-the-art transfer was completed using a Pro Tools workstation running at 24-bit/192kHz resolution via a Prism Sound A/D convertor. In all instances the artistic integrity of the songs trumped technical considerations and only the rare glitch–a click, a vocal mike pop, or a rough edit were improved when possible. De-noising technology was used but sparingly–only five of 525 minutes of running time was processed in this fashion. More provocative was the use of compression on the stereo transfers. A common way of bumping up the overall volume and sonically fattening today’s pop music the engineers stated that at most, a modest +3-4dB of compression was used–a drop in the bucket compared with the signal crunching +12-13dB often used today.
For even the most casual Beatles fan, the improvement in sonics from these remasters will be nothing less than thrilling. Like a painstaking restoration of a work of art the Beatles music sounds as if an almost imperceptible-build-up of decades-old glaze was suddenly removed from the surface of the sonic canvas revealing the artist’s bright and bold original palette. And compared with the 1987 CDs, the remasters are warmer, more detailed, and possess a livelier midrange energy and distinctively fuller bloom in the lower mids and upper bass. The treble is non-edgy and tonally more akin to the Parlophone LPs. They also, mercifully avoid the treble boost of the otherwise solid MoFi Box set. Taken together, you’ll hear more clang to “Maxwell’s Silver Hammer”. Ringo’s drum fills are fuller and louder. The string orchestra and winds of “Good Night” more fluid and naturalistic. Whether it was the fuzzy guitar feedback of “I Feel Fine” the open-chord intro of “A Hard Day’s Night” the crashing final chord and squeaky piano bench that concludes “A Day In the Life”, as the discs continued to spin, one iconic moment after another reclaimed my attention and provided new insights.
But above all it’s the glorious singing and rich inventive harmonies and double-tracked vocals that shimmer and shine and electrify with ranges of expression broader and more transparent than ever before. Like freshly minted coins, Paul’s tender “Mother Nature’s Son” and John’s acerbic “Good Morning Good Morning” hardly sound like the same songs. And you’re going to want to grab a soothing glass of milk after Lennon’s lacerating, volcanic “Twist and Shout” vocal.
However depending on which camp you’ve pitched your tent, you’ll either be delighted or disenchanted with the well-muscled bass reproduction. For purists, this may likely be the most controversial aspect of these remasters. However, acolytes of Paul McCartney will thrill at the clarity and acrobatic dexterity of his bass lines. Ringo’s fans will be equally stunned at the reverberant impact off the skins. But I’ve never heard “Fixing A Hole” with a footprint this heavy before. Certainly a touch of compression would account for some of the added punch and presence in the low end but to these ears a bit of added bass EQ also seems likely. Tasteful certainly–accurate, doubtful. And as good as these remasters are, they still retain trace elements of digital sterility, and the best Beatles LPs rival them in some areas with an almost organic, airy delicacy.
As for the mono recordings, they are so good they may unwittingly revive a cult. The strong central image actually permits the early two-track material more bang and integrity (and yes, layering) over the hard-panned processed stereo versions–where a lead vocal was often isolated in one channel while bass, drums, and guitar piggybacked in the other. Overall they sound a bit softer and lack the tight bottom end of the later stereos, but then there’s a track like “Helter Skelter” from The White Album which, in its immediacy and speed will rip your driver a new diaphragm. However the best part of the mono set is easily Sgt. Pepper, the album where one can argue that the notably unique mono and the stereo versions cross the finish line in a dead heat. I wouldn’t choose the mono set over the stereo discs but for completists willing to explore the subtle discrepancies and minutiae buried in the rival mixes, the monos are special.
At a pre-launch press conference I attended at Capitol Records this past June (see picture below), key issues remain tantalizingly unaddressed–like a potential Blu-ray disc box that combines a refreshed Beatles anthology in high definition with high-resolution versions of the albums? Also, Apple Records is keenly aware of surging turntable sales but do they see this as an opportunity for one last royal 180gram box set? And if so, would EMI go to the trouble of cutting vinyl from the original masters or just use the newly archived 24-bit/192kHz files? Regarding vinyl, the Apple exec paused as if to ponder the possibilities, “It’s not a matter of if, only a matter of when.” he replied. As for whether the analog masters will once more be pressed into service, the answer is out there, somewhere, or as the late John Lennon once sang, “Nothing is real”.
Source: https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/the-beatles-remasters-the-stereo-albums-and-the-beatles-in-mono/
How bad were the original Beatles CDs issued back in 1987? So bad that even the clueless conditioned to believe that CDs represented an automatic sonic step up from vinyl noticed something was terribly wrong.
Amusing to some observers was the nature of the complaints: “they sound tinny,” “they sound flat,” “they sound thin and bright,” “they’re harsh and edgy,” “where’s the warmth?” etc.
Why did it take The Beatles for these folks to notice how bad almost every attempt at re-mastering great analog recordings to CD sounded?
I can’t name a single CD reissue back then that sounded as good as the original LP version, never mind any that sounded better, yet the same folks who chucked their LPs and were happily munching on their crispy CDs somehow heard all of the problems with the 1987 Beatles CDs they might have heard with all of their CDs had they paid more attention.
Leave it to the mythical Beatles to pull down the CD format’s digital pants and expose its, er, shortcomings. Not surprising since the group has held a special place in the hearts, minds and souls of generations and not surprising considering how well recorded the albums were—even the “primitive” early ones, thanks to the EMI studios, engineers Norman Smith and Geoff Emerick and of course producer George Martin.
Add low rent, almost dismissive packaging for such hallowed musical ground and the curious decision to issue the first four in mono only, when both mono and stereo versions would have fit on a single disc and you have a truly shitty reissue program, one that thumbed EMI’s corporate nose at both the surviving Beatles and especially the group’s fans.
The New Remasters
As reported elsewhere on this site and all over the media, this time EMI was determined to do a much better job and by any standard they have, both in terms of the sonics and especially the packaging.
The stereo box is deluxe in every way, with gatefolded digi-pak style jackets, original label artwork, previously unseen photos and Quick-Time mini-documentaries accompanying each disc. An additional disc holds all of the documentaries so you can watch all of them without having to go through the individual discs. In addition to the original releases, the set includes a double CD of singles and EPs not appearing on the original UK sets, which usually omitted the singles.
One curious move was the decision to use George Martin’s 1987 re-mixes of Rubber Soul and Help! instead of the original stereo mixes. These were digitized at 16 bit/44.1K resolution using what today would be considered stone aged A/D converters.
So if anyone tells you that the “new” Rubber Soul and Help! reissues sound so much better than the 1987 issues, ask them what they weren’t smoking. Surely, mood enhanced they’d notice they were listening to the same mixes, only perhaps a bit louder and punchier due to the touch of compression applied to all of these stereo reissues.
Ironically, if you want to hear the original stereo mixes of Rubber Soul and Help! transferred without compression you’ll need to buy the mono box! Yes, the producers chose to tack the original stereo mixes onto the mono CDs of these two albums. More about that later.
The compression applied is so minor it’s not worth worrying about. Yes, these reissues do sound a bit “punchier” and “louder,” but overall the reissue producers have not messed around much with what was on the tapes that they transferred at 192K/24 bit resolution, with one notable exception: clearly they’ve boosted the bass on every one of these stereo masters and I don’t write that simply because I’m used to the LPs and perhaps the LPs had their bass slightly rolled off. I’ve heard the master tape of Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band and there’s more bass on these reissues than I remember hearing on that tape.
On a full range playback system, one that’s reasonably flat to 20Hz, the added bass, though tastefully done, can become oppressive after a while, but for most listeners both the added bottom and the “pop” provided by the compression will sound like pleasing “fresheners” instead of deal breakers. Don’t worry: these reissue do not sound like the “modernized” abomination that was 1.
What excites most listeners about the new reissues is the return of the tactile, warm sound, or some of it at least, found on the original LPs. These CDs do sound really good, with some expression of instrumental textures, depth and inner detail resolution. For folks who grew up on the ’87 CDs and who haven’t touched base with the original vinyl (or any vinyl since 1987), these CDs are a revelation.
They are as good as one can expect from CDs but surely the process of reducing 192k/24 transfers to 44.1k/16 has taken a toll on various aspects of the sound because the original UK vinyl still beats these CDs in most ways, by a narrow margin in some and by a much wider one in others.
For instance, on the cover of Buddy Holly’s “Words of Love,” there’s a particular ring to the high pitched electric guitar lines that one hears live and on the original LPs that just doesn’t register on the CD. The ring should jump out at you as it does live and on the LP. On the CD it remains boxed in physically and is tonally truncated. And yes, you can be an aging boomer whose hearing may not be what it once was, and yet still hear it.
The handclaps sound very good but they just don’t sound fleshy-real as they do on the LP, nor do they inhabit the separate space they do on the LP. Nor do the vocals project into 3D space. The harmonies, so easily split into separate voices on the LP fuse into one on the CD. John Lennon’s voice has a chilling quality that cuts through you on LP throughout the Beatles catalog. It’s lacking on the CD. You can feel Lennon alive on the other side of the mic on the LPs, you don’t derive the sensation on the CDs good as they are.
The CDs are genuinely pleasing to listen to physically and intellectually, the LPs sound even better and they take you for an emotional roller coaster ride the CDs just don’t. That’s not just my reaction: it’s what everyone who’s listened here heard, including people who don’t have an analog axe to grind.
On the other hand, the closer the digital comes to the analog—and these CDs come closer than most—the more the differences between the two formats assert themselves, for better or worse. Listening to these excellent sounding CDs with their jet black backdrops and ultra-cleanliness means that when you put the records on, while they do sound better, you just wish you could have the superior sound of one and the pristine perfection and black backdrops of the other! Previously, what was there on the CDs was so bad sounding, the black backdrops were hardly compensatory.
So, will a Blu-ray set mastered at full 192K/24 bit resolution (maybe with the bass turned down a bit too?) produce near perfection and sound superior to clean original LPs? I don’t know, nor are we likely to find out as such a release has not been announced.
LPs are supposedly coming next year and since Sean Magee and Steve Rooke, two of the engineers who worked on the project also are expert lathe operators (they’ve cut for Pure Pleasure, Warner Brothers, Steve Albini and others) and since Abbey Road has a very good sounding DMM lathe and since the full resolution files are right there, why wouldn’t they use the 192K/24 bit masters to produce the LPs? As The Doors box proved, once you’re at that resolution, it’s almost analog.
In the case of The Doors, the deteriorated tapes made a one pass digital transfer a necessity. The Beatles tapes are in excellent condition and the original tapes could be used to cut from analog but at this point in time you can be the powers that be prefer consistently across format lines to religious purity, so don’t expect AAA, though we can hope, as we can hope for fold-over laminated cover art as well done as the fold-over, laminated mini-LP CD sleeves complete with facsimiles of the original inner sleeves found in the mono box.
The Mono Masters
Given a choice of one box or the other, I’d opt for the mono box. For one thing, the transfers were apparently done without compression or augmented equalization. They are what’s on the tape, though again, the 192k/24 bit masters have been squeezed through the redbook CD sausage machine. The mono packaging is more authentic as well. The Beatles for instance, features a miniature duplicate of the laminated, double gatefold “top loader” fold-over jacket complete with black inner sleeves, individual color portraits and fold-open poster.
The “stereo’ mixes of the first two albums, with vocals on one side and instruments on the other, produced that way to allow for vocal/instrumental balance to be adjusted later, sound interesting on the stereo box, but they sound fuller and whole in mono.
A Hard Day’s Night sound better in stereo than mono in my opinion but the mono mix is fine too. I prefer Help in stereo too (the original mix found on the mono box for sure!) but not everyone agrees with that. For Sale is preferable in stereo too, but again, the mono mix offers its own pleasures.
As for Rubber Soul and Revolver the complexities of the arrangements required track bouncing. Track bouncing made a true stereo mix difficult so you a lot hard/left right stuff as on the first few albums, so overall the original mono mixes really are preferable but nostalgiacs whose genes are now encoded with the stereo mixes will probably stick with those, though the original stereo mix of Rubber Soul found on the mono box is preferable.
The mono mixes are strikingly different from the stereo ones, particularly on the later, more complex productions as anyone who has them on vinyl knows. More than just mix differences, are differing takes and parts that are highlighted in the accompanying booklet, though most of those are on the earlier albums. Some people revel in hearing and exposing these difference, like where John fluffs a lyric on one version and not the other, but that kind of thing has never excited me so you’ll have to look elsewhere for a catalogue of those.
Not many Beatles fans have heard Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band or The Beatles in mono. These are the mixes upon which the band members lavished their full attention and that will be obvious when you hear them—not that there’s anything whatsoever wrong with the stereo mixes. When I compared the original stereo Parlophone LP with the new stereo CD, it wasn’t even close: the record is richer, fuller and far more tonally pleasing. Ditto the mono LP vs the new CD.
Oh, and you also get the original stereo mixes of Rubber Soul and Help! transferred from analog at 192k/24 bit, which you don’t get in the stereo box. Needless to say those two sound much better than the remixes found on the stereo box.
The Verdict
Both the packaging and sound of these two sets (the stereo albums are available separately) are digitized editions finally worthy of The Beatles. The packaging is superb, great care went into the mastering, which attempted to bump up the sound for modern ears without ruining the ride for those used to the original sound. In that the team has mostly succeeded.
The packaging of both boxes is truly deluxe and any Beatle fan, even those who own all of the original UK vinyl, will want to have these sets for the packaging enhancements alone.
Hopefully higher resolution digital and/or analog will follow. Sure, I’d prefer new vinyl cut from the analog originals and we can all lobby for it, but I doubt it will happen.
Source: https://www.analogplanet.com/content/beatles-remasters-splendid-time-guaranteed-most-0
Source: https://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/the-beatles-remasters-the-stereo-albums-and-the-beatles-in-mono/
The Beatles Remasters: A Splendid Time Is Guaranteed For Most
Michael Fremer-Dec 31, 2010How bad were the original Beatles CDs issued back in 1987? So bad that even the clueless conditioned to believe that CDs represented an automatic sonic step up from vinyl noticed something was terribly wrong.
Amusing to some observers was the nature of the complaints: “they sound tinny,” “they sound flat,” “they sound thin and bright,” “they’re harsh and edgy,” “where’s the warmth?” etc.
Why did it take The Beatles for these folks to notice how bad almost every attempt at re-mastering great analog recordings to CD sounded?
I can’t name a single CD reissue back then that sounded as good as the original LP version, never mind any that sounded better, yet the same folks who chucked their LPs and were happily munching on their crispy CDs somehow heard all of the problems with the 1987 Beatles CDs they might have heard with all of their CDs had they paid more attention.
Leave it to the mythical Beatles to pull down the CD format’s digital pants and expose its, er, shortcomings. Not surprising since the group has held a special place in the hearts, minds and souls of generations and not surprising considering how well recorded the albums were—even the “primitive” early ones, thanks to the EMI studios, engineers Norman Smith and Geoff Emerick and of course producer George Martin.
Add low rent, almost dismissive packaging for such hallowed musical ground and the curious decision to issue the first four in mono only, when both mono and stereo versions would have fit on a single disc and you have a truly shitty reissue program, one that thumbed EMI’s corporate nose at both the surviving Beatles and especially the group’s fans.
The New Remasters
As reported elsewhere on this site and all over the media, this time EMI was determined to do a much better job and by any standard they have, both in terms of the sonics and especially the packaging.
The stereo box is deluxe in every way, with gatefolded digi-pak style jackets, original label artwork, previously unseen photos and Quick-Time mini-documentaries accompanying each disc. An additional disc holds all of the documentaries so you can watch all of them without having to go through the individual discs. In addition to the original releases, the set includes a double CD of singles and EPs not appearing on the original UK sets, which usually omitted the singles.
One curious move was the decision to use George Martin’s 1987 re-mixes of Rubber Soul and Help! instead of the original stereo mixes. These were digitized at 16 bit/44.1K resolution using what today would be considered stone aged A/D converters.
So if anyone tells you that the “new” Rubber Soul and Help! reissues sound so much better than the 1987 issues, ask them what they weren’t smoking. Surely, mood enhanced they’d notice they were listening to the same mixes, only perhaps a bit louder and punchier due to the touch of compression applied to all of these stereo reissues.
Ironically, if you want to hear the original stereo mixes of Rubber Soul and Help! transferred without compression you’ll need to buy the mono box! Yes, the producers chose to tack the original stereo mixes onto the mono CDs of these two albums. More about that later.
The compression applied is so minor it’s not worth worrying about. Yes, these reissues do sound a bit “punchier” and “louder,” but overall the reissue producers have not messed around much with what was on the tapes that they transferred at 192K/24 bit resolution, with one notable exception: clearly they’ve boosted the bass on every one of these stereo masters and I don’t write that simply because I’m used to the LPs and perhaps the LPs had their bass slightly rolled off. I’ve heard the master tape of Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band and there’s more bass on these reissues than I remember hearing on that tape.
On a full range playback system, one that’s reasonably flat to 20Hz, the added bass, though tastefully done, can become oppressive after a while, but for most listeners both the added bottom and the “pop” provided by the compression will sound like pleasing “fresheners” instead of deal breakers. Don’t worry: these reissue do not sound like the “modernized” abomination that was 1.
What excites most listeners about the new reissues is the return of the tactile, warm sound, or some of it at least, found on the original LPs. These CDs do sound really good, with some expression of instrumental textures, depth and inner detail resolution. For folks who grew up on the ’87 CDs and who haven’t touched base with the original vinyl (or any vinyl since 1987), these CDs are a revelation.
They are as good as one can expect from CDs but surely the process of reducing 192k/24 transfers to 44.1k/16 has taken a toll on various aspects of the sound because the original UK vinyl still beats these CDs in most ways, by a narrow margin in some and by a much wider one in others.
For instance, on the cover of Buddy Holly’s “Words of Love,” there’s a particular ring to the high pitched electric guitar lines that one hears live and on the original LPs that just doesn’t register on the CD. The ring should jump out at you as it does live and on the LP. On the CD it remains boxed in physically and is tonally truncated. And yes, you can be an aging boomer whose hearing may not be what it once was, and yet still hear it.
The handclaps sound very good but they just don’t sound fleshy-real as they do on the LP, nor do they inhabit the separate space they do on the LP. Nor do the vocals project into 3D space. The harmonies, so easily split into separate voices on the LP fuse into one on the CD. John Lennon’s voice has a chilling quality that cuts through you on LP throughout the Beatles catalog. It’s lacking on the CD. You can feel Lennon alive on the other side of the mic on the LPs, you don’t derive the sensation on the CDs good as they are.
The CDs are genuinely pleasing to listen to physically and intellectually, the LPs sound even better and they take you for an emotional roller coaster ride the CDs just don’t. That’s not just my reaction: it’s what everyone who’s listened here heard, including people who don’t have an analog axe to grind.
On the other hand, the closer the digital comes to the analog—and these CDs come closer than most—the more the differences between the two formats assert themselves, for better or worse. Listening to these excellent sounding CDs with their jet black backdrops and ultra-cleanliness means that when you put the records on, while they do sound better, you just wish you could have the superior sound of one and the pristine perfection and black backdrops of the other! Previously, what was there on the CDs was so bad sounding, the black backdrops were hardly compensatory.
So, will a Blu-ray set mastered at full 192K/24 bit resolution (maybe with the bass turned down a bit too?) produce near perfection and sound superior to clean original LPs? I don’t know, nor are we likely to find out as such a release has not been announced.
LPs are supposedly coming next year and since Sean Magee and Steve Rooke, two of the engineers who worked on the project also are expert lathe operators (they’ve cut for Pure Pleasure, Warner Brothers, Steve Albini and others) and since Abbey Road has a very good sounding DMM lathe and since the full resolution files are right there, why wouldn’t they use the 192K/24 bit masters to produce the LPs? As The Doors box proved, once you’re at that resolution, it’s almost analog.
In the case of The Doors, the deteriorated tapes made a one pass digital transfer a necessity. The Beatles tapes are in excellent condition and the original tapes could be used to cut from analog but at this point in time you can be the powers that be prefer consistently across format lines to religious purity, so don’t expect AAA, though we can hope, as we can hope for fold-over laminated cover art as well done as the fold-over, laminated mini-LP CD sleeves complete with facsimiles of the original inner sleeves found in the mono box.
The Mono Masters
Given a choice of one box or the other, I’d opt for the mono box. For one thing, the transfers were apparently done without compression or augmented equalization. They are what’s on the tape, though again, the 192k/24 bit masters have been squeezed through the redbook CD sausage machine. The mono packaging is more authentic as well. The Beatles for instance, features a miniature duplicate of the laminated, double gatefold “top loader” fold-over jacket complete with black inner sleeves, individual color portraits and fold-open poster.
The “stereo’ mixes of the first two albums, with vocals on one side and instruments on the other, produced that way to allow for vocal/instrumental balance to be adjusted later, sound interesting on the stereo box, but they sound fuller and whole in mono.
A Hard Day’s Night sound better in stereo than mono in my opinion but the mono mix is fine too. I prefer Help in stereo too (the original mix found on the mono box for sure!) but not everyone agrees with that. For Sale is preferable in stereo too, but again, the mono mix offers its own pleasures.
As for Rubber Soul and Revolver the complexities of the arrangements required track bouncing. Track bouncing made a true stereo mix difficult so you a lot hard/left right stuff as on the first few albums, so overall the original mono mixes really are preferable but nostalgiacs whose genes are now encoded with the stereo mixes will probably stick with those, though the original stereo mix of Rubber Soul found on the mono box is preferable.
The mono mixes are strikingly different from the stereo ones, particularly on the later, more complex productions as anyone who has them on vinyl knows. More than just mix differences, are differing takes and parts that are highlighted in the accompanying booklet, though most of those are on the earlier albums. Some people revel in hearing and exposing these difference, like where John fluffs a lyric on one version and not the other, but that kind of thing has never excited me so you’ll have to look elsewhere for a catalogue of those.
Not many Beatles fans have heard Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band or The Beatles in mono. These are the mixes upon which the band members lavished their full attention and that will be obvious when you hear them—not that there’s anything whatsoever wrong with the stereo mixes. When I compared the original stereo Parlophone LP with the new stereo CD, it wasn’t even close: the record is richer, fuller and far more tonally pleasing. Ditto the mono LP vs the new CD.
Oh, and you also get the original stereo mixes of Rubber Soul and Help! transferred from analog at 192k/24 bit, which you don’t get in the stereo box. Needless to say those two sound much better than the remixes found on the stereo box.
The Verdict
Both the packaging and sound of these two sets (the stereo albums are available separately) are digitized editions finally worthy of The Beatles. The packaging is superb, great care went into the mastering, which attempted to bump up the sound for modern ears without ruining the ride for those used to the original sound. In that the team has mostly succeeded.
The packaging of both boxes is truly deluxe and any Beatle fan, even those who own all of the original UK vinyl, will want to have these sets for the packaging enhancements alone.
Hopefully higher resolution digital and/or analog will follow. Sure, I’d prefer new vinyl cut from the analog originals and we can all lobby for it, but I doubt it will happen.
Source: https://www.analogplanet.com/content/beatles-remasters-splendid-time-guaranteed-most-0