Beatles Remastered

DMurphy · « **Reply #20 on:** 10 Sep 2009, 10:13 pm »

Quote from: Wayner on 10 Sep 2009, 09:59 pm

R Swerdlow is correct. When the Beatles first came into the scene, mono was the only technology. As time progressed, albums like Abbey Road and St. Pepper were released in stereo. Lots of other artists where caught in the same time period like Tommy James and the Schondells or even Elvis, Roy Orbison and Frank Sinatra. I think our dearly departed Les Paul had some major influence on multi-tracking and the advent of stereo sound reproduction in the vinyl format, which at the time (other then a few R to R affectionados) was the only way to listen to canned music.

I also like the stereo versions.

Wayner

I'm not quite sure what you mean by mono being "the only technology." The only one the Beatles cared about? or the only technology? Because stereo was as a commercial technology was alive and well in 1958, 4 years before "I want to hold your hand" Some of the greatest stereo classical recordings were made in 1958.

Wayner · « **Reply #21 on:** 10 Sep 2009, 11:00 pm »

Not all studios were up to snuff. I totally agree that there are some wonderful stereo recordings that were around by that time, but that was not the average technology. I remember as a kid that many FM stations did not broadcast in stereo until the very late 60's or early 70's.

Wayner

bummrush · « **Reply #22 on:** 10 Sep 2009, 11:02 pm »

Stereo, Mono, who knows the story,one thing is certain these are extraordinary recordings.

ted_b · « **Reply #23 on:** 10 Sep 2009, 11:18 pm »

Quote from: floresjc on 10 Sep 2009, 08:14 pm

audiotom -

Would you care to share your impressions on the differences between the two? You have a really good system and it would be nice to hear an avg Joe's impressions of the two products. My wife ordered the stereo version and some books from Amazon, but I'm kind of intrigued by the "way it's intended" argument that alot of the older listeners are putting forth and are familiar with the original sound. I may end up getting both if they reprint, which it sounds like they will.

There are dozens and dozens of mix differences between the mono recordings and the stereo ones. too many for this thread. here is a good start:
http://www.columbia.edu/~brennan/beatles/

My quick synopsis I tell most people who ask:
The White Album, MMT (EP) and Pepper all all very different albums in mono vs stereo, with significantly changed tone, speed, highlighting and instrumentation mixes. You must hear both versions. The first 5 (before RS) are basically mono must haves. I like RS and Revolver in stereo, but YMMV.

rockadanny · « **Reply #24 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 02:47 am »

This is why I wish you could at least buy just half of the mono box set - for the first five releases. An alternate box set would have been nice: The Early Monos. I really like RS and on stereo CDs (bought them individually) but I really do wish to hear the first five as mono, but I do not want to pay $200 for them. Anybody in Atlanta wish to hear RS, etc. stereo mix remasters in exchange for me hearing the first five (or so) mono remasters? A temporary loan swap or combined session? My place? My beer?

mchuckp · « **Reply #25 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 02:47 am »

I've never heard the mono recordings but from what I've read, I'm intrigued. So I preordered it from Amazon and it in the mail and should get it very soon. In the meantime, I bought Abbey Road, Let It Be, and Sgt. Pepper as individuals in stereo. On my STRTs, I'm blown away by Abbey Road. The soundstage is HUGE, transients are top notch, and instrument and vocal separation are impeccable. They did an incredible job and the remasters were well needed. I find Sgt. Pepper to be close in quality to Abbey Road and well worth the money. Let it Be is a different beast. It was meant to be a rough album with no overdubs or post recording manipulation. The recording is true to what they did and the roughness comes through. Not a disc I will put in to show off my system like Abbey Rd or Pepper but it is what it is. 3 tracks on it did get further work and you can tell. The Long and winding Road's string section is REALLY nice.

I think I'm gonna also pick up MMT, White Album, Revolver, and Yellow Submarine in stereo.

Some people say these releases is one big money making machine and yeah some people are going to make out quite nice. But it isn't like we got reboxed CDs in fancy boxes that theoretically sound better. These are BIG improvements and I'm happy to pay for that. If I was a casual listener and only had a boombox, no probably not worth it. But anyone with a half way decent set up will hear the difference pretty prominently.

Now just need to get my mono set. Come on Mailman!!!

Wayner · « **Reply #26 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 11:50 am »

The only problem I have about the mono recordings is how they are being marketed. "Hear the albums as they were intended" is not accurate. Early Beatles were recorded in mono cause that is all they had.

Early Beachboys, Dylan and lots of others that started in that era were in mono. I remember when there were very few FM stations that broadcast in "stereo" and the little red light would come on! Wow! Sorry If I'm dating my age a little.

Just curious, what is the name of the first Beatles album and what date is on it, anyone know?

Wayner

ted_b · « **Reply #27 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 12:04 pm »

Please Please Me was the first Beatles album (official UK EMI catalog) and released March 22 1963 (mono) and a month later in stereo. In the US, Introducing the Beatles (Vee-Jay Records) was January 10th of 1964, and the the first Capitol album, Meet the Beatles, ten days later.

jkelly · « **Reply #28 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 12:10 pm »

This edition of Record Producers, previously announced on another thread,
will answer all your questions on 2 track, 4 track, unlocked 2/4 track and
finally 8 track and how they made mono and stereo versions.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00mkgzx

Levi · « **Reply #29 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 01:19 pm »

Hi All,

I grew up listening to The Beatles. I remembered my Dad bought another turntable so he can play a stack of 45s and play non-stop Beatles automatically.

Most of their songs are short even back then. I love The Beatles! On the contrary, my youngest sister who was born in the early 80s hated the Beatles or could have cared less.

Now that I have the The Beatles stereo box set, definitely there is no going back the previous 1987 collection. The $180+/- price of admission I think is of great value. Beatles fans rejoice. What about a remastered in vinyl? All I can say is have faith!

Cheers,
--Levi

srb · « **Reply #30 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 07:10 pm »

Quote from: Wayner on 11 Sep 2009, 11:50 am

I remember when there were very few FM stations that broadcast in "stereo" and the little red light would come on! Wow! Sorry If I'm dating my age a little.
Wayner

I remember an early 60's Fisher receiver (800-B) that had "FM-AM Stereo" in addition to FM Multiplex. One stereo channel was broadcast on FM and the other stereo channel was broadcast on AM. This FM-AM Stereo scheme was only broadcast in a few major cities and only for a few years!

Steve

thunderbrick · « **Reply #31 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 08:26 pm »

I might be losing my mind, but I am convinced in the late 50's or very early 60's Disney broadcast a stereo version of the "Rite of Spring" excerpt from Fantasia on TV, with one channel of sound on TV and the other on FM. Anybody else out there losing their minds who might remember and confirm this?

I remember all the excitement when we listened to it, and there was a big build up in my house preceding it. We listened on a '57 Fisher tuner that I later inherited.

Wayner · « **Reply #32 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 08:48 pm »

First, Steve, I had a Heathkit AM/FM multi-plex tuner! In the old days, if a station had an AM and an FM broadcast capability, they would do a special at night with AM on the left channel and FM for the right channel. This tuner had seperate dial controls for each band and when you put it into multiplex mode, "STEREO" was had by one and all. All this done before the days of multi-plexing.

Back to the Beatles, why would they want mono when the new emerging technology was stereo? In the early '80s, what band didn't want to be recorded in digital? Remember those codes: AAD, ADD and DDD? Wow, was that something to have one of the first DDD CDs! I think mine was Duran Duran Notorious.

Wayner

srb · « **Reply #33 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 08:59 pm »

Quote from: thunderbrick on 11 Sep 2009, 08:26 pm

I might be losing my mind, but I am convinced in the late 50's or very early 60's Disney broadcast a stereo version of the "Rite of Spring" excerpt from Fantasia on TV, with one channel of sound on TV and the other on FM.

You're probably not losing your mind. I couldn't find reference to the Fantasia broadcast, but answers.com had this to report:

"The first several shows of the 1958 - 59 season of The Plymouth Show (AKA The Lawrence Welk Show) on the ABC network were broadcast with stereophonic sound in some cities, with one audio channel broadcast via television and the other over the ABC radio network. By the same method, NBC Television and the NBC Radio Network offered stereo sound for The George Gobel Show on October 21, 1958. On January 30, 1959, ABC's Walt Disney Presents made a stereo broadcast of The Peter Tchaikovsky Story, including scenes from Disney's latest animated feature, Sleeping Beauty, by using ABC-affiliated AM and FM stations for the left and right audio channels."

Wayne, sounds like your Heathkit predated the Fisher 800-B (which I believe was 1962), as it also had FM Multiplex.

It will be very interesting to hear some comparisons from those that are getting both mono and stereo versions of the Beatles recordings.

Steve

bunnyma357 · « **Reply #34 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 09:32 pm »

Quote from: Wayner on 11 Sep 2009, 08:48 pm

Back to the Beatles, why would they want mono when the new emerging technology was stereo?

Wayner

Because their audience was listening on cheap mono radios, just like now a lot of bands/labels want to be "loud" so you get compression & clipping that destroys the content, but sounds better in cars and on iPods. Pop music is usually tailored for the likely delivery medium, not the best available medium.

The Beatles were originally selling to an unsophisticated teen audience.

Jim C

Eric · « **Reply #35 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 09:36 pm »

Quote from: floresjc on 9 Sep 2009, 09:25 pm

Anyone get the new box sets of the Beatles recordings? I'm trying to figure out which one to get, mono or stereo. Too young to know the difference in the recordings.

I purchased the stereo

jkelly · « **Reply #36 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 10:06 pm »

The stereo records were also recorded in mono. Panning mono recorded instruments L or R created
the stereo "image". Mixing down mono tracks to a stereo pair is what created the stereo.

I think the real issue was having to work with 4 tracks when you have 4 musicians and 2 or 3 vocals and
other instruments while having to get to a stereo pair. I guess they went down a few generations.

Jeff

ted_b · « **Reply #37 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 10:13 pm »

Quote from: jkelly on 11 Sep 2009, 10:06 pm

BTW the stereo records were also recorded in mono. Panning mono recorded instruments L or R created
the stereo "image". AFAIN, mixing down to a stereo pair is what created the stereo.

Jeff

This is not true at all except for a song or two early (She loves You, etc.). The stereo ones are true stereo (sometimes ping-pongy but discrete true stereo nonetheless) and in fact often have different mixes and dubs.

jkelly · « **Reply #38 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 10:32 pm »

I thought it was all in the mix down. I know the stereo versions where done at a later time.
So they had different takes done in true stereo for the stereo albums that were also available
in Mono?

Jeff

Toka · « **Reply #39 on:** 11 Sep 2009, 10:48 pm »

I picked up the mono box...sounds much better to any stereo release to my ears (possible exception granted to The White Album). The mono just sounds more alive and "there". I will likely pick up some of the stereo discs later, but not anything before Sgt. Pepper. As someone already mentioned all of these albums were intended to be heard in mono; the stereo mixes were an afterthought. This has been documented (at absurd length) elsewheres.