My 2009 Beatles Cd-box is still sealed...

2 1 2 0

Quote
kowalski

Quote
GasLightStreet
This is an interesting article on The Beatles remasters. I was looking up some info on Bob Ludwig with the Stones catalog remasters and Googled his name with The Beatles to see if he had any comments.

[www.soundandvision.com]

This part particularly :

"Sound + Vision: Mastering engineer Bob Ludwig has said: "I often say how grateful I am that, when the Beatles were doing their recordings, digital limiters didn't exist, because if those recordings had been squashed to death like so many contemporary records are, they would never have the longevity that they have had." In light of that, it's admirable that you have used limiting on the stereo versions only - and only, as the press release says, "moderately."

Massey: We were obviously aware of the Loudness Wars - squashing, brickwalling, all that sort of stuff - and we didn't want to do that. We wanted to retain the original dynamics. So for the loudest part of the loudest songs, there may be limiting of 3 to 4 dB, but for most of the songs, most of the time, there isn't any limiting.

Sound + Vision: And so this was an effort to help make the primitive-stereo mixes come across more powerfully to the new generation?

Massey: Yes.

Rouse: And I would take issue a tiny little bit with what Bob Ludwig said. If you would quote again the last part of what he said.

Sound + Vision: ". . . because if those recordings had been squashed to death like so many contemporary records are, they would never have the longevity that they have had."

Rouse: That statement doesn't give much credit to the songs. Because the Beatles aren't just about sound; they're about the fact that they were particularly good songwriters and musicians. The very thought that people wouldn't have continued buying Beatles records because of the sound - sorry, I can't agree with that."

Clearly Rouse misses Ludwig's point. If they're unlistenable, why would people continue to buy them? The Stones 2009 reissues certainly could support that - next to no one bought them and I certainly did not (the only exception being the stupid SOME GIRLS double reissue with the extras) knowing that they were fooked up by the shitass remastering job.

The Beatles, as usual, changed the game. I've been listening to those Beatles CDs my whole life. I never had a problem with them. If I did, I just chocked it up to them being 40 year old recordings. But the campaign they pulled out was marvelous. Obviously there was standard marketing practices involved, but moreso than ever they made it feel like it was being done with love and respect to the recordings. I didn't get caught up in the whole "you haven't really been listening to the Beatles all these years", but they really DID make you feel like you needed this new sound. They were being remixed and remastered with Beatle participation to bring out all the elements that were meant to be heard on the songs.

No one had done a campaign like that, least of all the Stones. Their CDs, to my ears, have always sounded pretty comparable from remaster to remaster. Its done the same way most CDs are remastered, which is to say I don't know quite how thats done, but its not done with the attention to detail that warrants buying another copy. The Beatles did something that for some reason no one else had thought of when they all had the time to do it. And of course, right after them, it becomes a trend. Jimmy Page once again remasters his Zeppelin CDs to be "definitive", Pink Floyd pull out a big campaign as the "last real time these will be properly mixed for CD". But as usual, the Beatles did it first and the Beatles did it better.

I've enjoyed the Rolling Stones remasters, but they are literally on a whole other inferior universe to those Beatles ones.

Quote
Come On
My 2009 Beatles Cd-box is still sealed...

My 2009 mono box has been opened since day one, and is showing signs of wear and tear due to heavy usage...
A couple cd's are even missing the individual plastic outer sleeves that somehow got lost in the shuffle.
Aside from that, everything is perfectly intact including all inner sleeves, etc., and the sound quality is still amazing.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

The 2009 Beatles remasters were great, although some of the stereo on the earlier cuts was too thin, and sound better in mono. The 2002 Stones SACDs are incredible, and it really works on the earliest albums, which weren't recorded that well. I don't think the 2009 Stones remasters of later work don't add much.

What I've gotten into lately is the 2015 Beatles 1 DVD compilation of their promo films. The BluRay sound is fantastic, and to watch Strawberry Fields and hear it on a 5.1 surround system is sublime.

Remixing might be more interesting than remastering, both Bands could do with a facelift in that regard.

landslide victory for the Beatles. Nothing more to add to this topic.

Quote
24FPS

What I've gotten into lately is the 2015 Beatles 1 DVD compilation of their promo films. The BluRay sound is fantastic, and to watch Strawberry Fields and hear it on a 5.1 surround system is sublime.

I like the new Stereo-Remixes of the Beatles 1+ Blu-ray too, they sound imho very well. I prefer e.g. 'Penny Lane' from the 1+ BR over the 2009 Remaster from the 24bit USB-Apple.

Quote
lapaz62

Remixing might be more interesting than remastering, both Bands could do with a facelift in that regard.

Just an idea: maybe we get in 2023 a 50th-Anniversary-Edition of the Red & Blue Album with audiophile Remixes of all songs in High Definition ....

Quote
RollingFreak
The Beatles, as usual, changed the game. I've been listening to those Beatles CDs my whole life. I never had a problem with them. If I did, I just chocked it up to them being 40 year old recordings. But the campaign they pulled out was marvelous. Obviously there was standard marketing practices involved, but moreso than ever they made it feel like it was being done with love and respect to the recordings. I didn't get caught up in the whole "you haven't really been listening to the Beatles all these years", but they really DID make you feel like you needed this new sound. They were being remixed and remastered with Beatle participation to bring out all the elements that were meant to be heard on the songs.

The only remixing that has ever happened to any Beatles albums was done by George Martin of HELP! and RUBBER SOUL in the mid 1980s before the original CD issues came out. The remasters were done strictly from the master mixes.

"This is a remaster project,” agrees Paul. "It's basically taking what George Martin, Norman Smith and Geoff Emerick considered to be the masters and making them sound as good as possible.”

The amount of care that was put in place, from the record label to the engineers, is incredible regarding the entire Beatles library of master tapes, as well as the amount of time spent remastering the catalog.

[www.soundonsound.com]

However, they did do what some might consider a remix for the "game" Rock Band: they unmixed the songs...

Also, Love and the soundtrack to Yellow Submarine were remixed and remastered. And Yellow Submarine sound fantastic. But being a fan of both bands the Beatles set the pace once again. The vinyl transfers for both the stereo and mono sets are stellar. Fantastic pure analog transfers where the masters were boosted to prior levels from the first releases. The mono trumps the stereo box with finally getting all the original mono mixes with a superb transfer from the original analog source tapes and closely following the original mixes in boosting lost signals and using technology to get the bass to what the original mix desired. Then there was the FLAC USB file with the entire collection on 24bit. You crank that through a fantastic DAC, and a great pair of headphones, you have the purest source where the literature says that is as close as you get to the mixing room playbacks. A few minor quibbles though. They did go in with the Stereo and "fixed" a few things that highly irritated me. I Want You (She's so Heavy) is one of my favorite Lennon/Beatles song. If not fav. Yet they went in and cleaned the audible click of the amp peddle right before Lennon starts his lead. That was a sublime nuance that gave the song a night club ashtray feel. Gone. I know they cleaned up a few other things that were actually important reasons the project is so good. Correcting tape speed issues, using the original analog mono mixes, even going so far as to dig up archived notes and making sure the signals matched what they first did. A lot of that was lost with the first transfers on CD.

Now I also compare my 1980s Japanese import collection that I have in pristine condition. Some of those sound better! Abby Road in particular has such a more earthy and full bass sound on the entire album, particularly with Come Together. But the Mono box set is hands down my preferred source. No brickwalling at all. THere is also the CD versions of the American albums that have come out in two separate boxes, and a recent Japanese release of their Japanese albums. Not the two Capital box sets are very interesting because in many instances they do have different mixes, much like the differences between the mono and stereo Beatles. They sound very good as well. Capital did a great job using their source tapes that often were different versions that were sent over from George Martin and his engineers.

So yet again though this comes down to the comparisons between how the Stones have handled their recorded legacy. It is pitiful. They need a true team of archivists and top notch analog technicians who can actually work to preserve the true analog source to give us top notch vinyl, CD, and FLAC files to enjoy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-02-28 19:10 by whitem8.

Quote
whitem8

So yet again though this comes down to the comparisons between how the Stones have handled their recorded legacy. It is pitiful. They need a true team of archivists and top notch analog technicians who can actually work to preserve the true analog source to give us top notch vinyl, CD, and FLAC files to enjoy.

Wasn't this already done with the 2011 DSD flat-transfers from the analogue master tapes by Mick McKenna and Richard Whittaker at the FX Copyroom (London, UK) ?

These DSD-transfers were used for the 2011 japanese SHM-SACDs from 'Sticky Fingers' to 'Dirty Work': [www.iorr.org] .

Yes, but that is such a limited release. On only the CD format. Why not do that for vinyl, and a usb 24 bit option? Not everyone has SACDs and this was Japanese release only. Again, a very limited view for marketing a comprehensive packaging and release of their music.

Quote
Come On
My 2009 Beatles Cd-box is still sealed...

I bought a play and a sealed copy...i also bought the mono vinyl!

Many of the albums in my Stereo are still sealed, I have been captivated by the Mono and all those are played, vinyl. However, I do have another Mono CD box unopened when they marketed that as a limited release. Seems like they changed their minds! I also have the apple usb. A work of art. And that eventually will not be as common as it is now. That is when I break out the headphones and kush.

Quote
whitem8
Many of the albums in my Stereo are still sealed, I have been captivated by the Mono and all those are played, vinyl. However, I do have another Mono CD box unopened when they marketed that as a limited release. Seems like they changed their minds! I also have the apple usb. A work of art. And that eventually will not be as common as it is now. That is when I break out the headphones and kush.

Yeah, I also got them on vinyl/Mono ...greatest of the greatest stuff...Went through 'Magical Mystery Tour' and 'Sgt Pepper' yesterday...

2 1 2 0