Remastered Beatles - stereo, mono or both?

[flippyshark]

So, I want to buy pretty much all of the newly remastered Beatles albums. Very unscientifically speaking, the samples heard in the linked promo video sound clearer than the same songs on my 80s era CDs via my computer, both playing through my computer's speakers.

Anyway, I'm especially interested in the mono mixes, and would probably be content to get the mono box (and then add the not-included Yellow Submarine, Let It Be and Abbey Road discs individually) BUT, the mono box is quite a lot more expensive (229.99) than the more complete stereo mix box set (179.99), even though it contains less material. OH, why do they do this?

Anyhow, if anyone has heard the mono remixes yet, and can report as to whether or not they are accurate and compelling, I'd appreciate it. (glances toward mousepod.) I've got very old worn vinyl of most of this stuff, and only about half of it on previous cd releases - I'd just buy both boxes if I lived in Fantasyland. As it is, I'm going to have to save up for these. But I'd be lying if I didn't say I was very psyched.

[mousepod]

I've heard 'em all. They sound very very good.

That said, I'm not going to repurchase the entire Beatles catalog for the umpteenth time. Especially on CD.

Assuming the vinyl reissues actually happen (in November?), I'll be buying them. As for the digital versions... I'll be happy for CD rips. The packaging is not important to me at this point.

But since you started the thread...

Chuck Klosterman Repeats The Beatles

[Snowflake]

Originally Posted by flippyshark

Anyway, I'm especially interested in the mono mixes, and would probably be content to get the mono box (and then add the not-included Yellow Submarine, Let It Be and Abbey Road discs individually) BUT, the mono box is quite a lot more expensive (229.99) than the more complete stereo mix box set (179.99), even though it contains less material. OH, why do they do this?

Easy, for the money!

I have none of this stuff on disc, in any form, any longer (save a couple of discs from the always generous MP)

It goes on the list, how I do sometimes miss my Tower Record days with promotional copies....of course, this one would be hotly contested over.

[DreadPirateRoberts]

Forgive the newbie question. What advantage does the mono have over the stereo? At first glance, wouldn't stereo be better?

[flippyshark]

Originally Posted by mousepod

But since you started the thread...

Chuck Klosterman Repeats The Beatles

Very amusing

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by DreadPirateRoberts

Forgive the newbie question. What advantage does the mono have over the stereo? At first glance, wouldn't stereo be better?

Mono is more "authentic", it's how the albums were originally released.

[mousepod]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Mono is more "authentic", it's how the albums were originally released.

It's not any more authentic than the stereo.

What's cool is that the Beatles albums were mixed differently for mono and stereo when they were first released, so they were absolutely unique versions.

Once mono finally died, the only releases were in stereo.

One oddball release (not in the mono box) is the Brazilian mono lp of Abbey Road. It's authentic in that it was commercially available in mono on release date, but not particularly interesting to most fans because it's just a folded-down version of the stereo mix.

[DreadPirateRoberts]

Originally Posted by Ghoulish Delight

Mono is more "authentic", it's how the albums were originally released.

Do you know if the "masters" were stereo or mono? was "stereoization" done after the fact?

[mousepod]

The early releases were legitimately mixed in stereo, not the horrible "electronic stereo" fakes.

[Gemini Cricket]

Well, if you get mono it's probably because you kissed someone infected.