Remastered Beatles - stereo, mono or both?

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by mousepod

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.

So in essence, the Mono version will appeal primarily to hard core music buffs who know sh*t like this. A demographic which spends more on music and thus allows the higher price point for the mono set.

[innerSpaceman]

Please someone stop me before i buy this.


Or rather, please someone give this a good comparative listen and tell me seriously if there's any reason to bother.




On the other hand, I'm the kind of rapid Beatles fan that knows all about the mono mixes and have enjoyed hearing some now and again, but I've no desire to buy the set of (imo) inferior and no less or more authentic recordings, even if it weren't more expensive.

[Gemini Cricket]

iSm, I say buy them both.

[innerSpaceman]

hmmm, maybe i'll do just that.



But I guess I'm actually the type of "rapid" Beatles fan who just types really quickly without spellchecking, and not the rabid type that might fall for this insane bit of marketing ploy. Um, the originals were not recorded well enough to even sound good on CD, much less "remastered." Um, why? 1960s, my friends. You cannot make this stuff sound good, otherwise it would not sound authentic.

[Moonliner]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Um, why? 1960s, my friends. You cannot make this stuff sound good, otherwise it would not sound authentic.

My thought exactly. Well said.

I'm perfectly happy with the versions I already have.

[Alex]

Well, I similarly demand that when old Technicolor movies are transferred to DVD\Blu-Ray that they maintain the imperfect alignment between the color strips. All the extra clarity is wrong.

[mousepod]

Actually, that's pretty silly. Microphones and recording technology were perfectly fine (sound-wise) back in the 1960s. However, mass-produced records are fraught with potential sound problems (and crappy styluses (stylii?) didn't help much either). The idea of these CDs is that the original master recordings are utilized and the digital reproduction will be lossless.

[innerSpaceman]

What recordings did they use for the first round of CD? The slaves?


mp, are you going to listen to any of them any time soon? I will trust your discerning ear.




As for imperfect technicolor strips ... I dunno about that. But I watched the blu-ray of Close Encounters the other night - - and it looked so crisp and clean and grainless that it seemed downright wrong at times.

[mousepod]

I've listened to much of the stereo and mono boxes so far. They sound spectacular. This is the best CD release so far.

I haven't compared them to the Purple Chick needle drops yet, but I imagine they're at least a little better.

Still, if I'm going to spend money on The Beatles again, I'm going to wait for the audiophile vinyl pressings.

[Alex]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

As for imperfect technicolor strips ... I dunno about that. But I watched the blu-ray of Close Encounters the other night - - and it looked so crisp and clean and grainless that it seemed downright wrong at times.

Yeah, I jested but there are legitimate issues (such as how much grain to leave in when cleaning up the dust and other later imperfections). For the new Wizard of Oz blu-ray the perfect alignment of the strips resulted in otherwise barely discernible strings snapping into perfect clarity when the flying monkeys come through. They made the decision to remove them (the monkeys, not the strings) digitally.