I don't buy or play vinyl anymore, so I'm writing here for the Beatles CDs, and only those which I've heard. I hated the 1987 CDs that were standard EMI reissues; dull, lifeless, an abomination to my ears for the most part and I am tempted (though not the kind of person!) to hold a grudge against the company to this day for ever allowing such a travesty to go unrectified for 22 years. Thanks and kudos to Dr. Robert, er, I mean Ebbetts for somewhat remedying this intolerable situation; while not perfect in terms of what is possible in the digital domain I feel he did an admirable job - he certainly cares! - and his CDs actually had me listening to Beatles music once again. Now comes the 2009 mono remasters & the 2009 stereo-only remasters. When I got the news that Dr. Ebbetts retired his Beatles project, saying that the 2009 remasters were superior to his own, I was both elated and sad at the same time. Was all that loving care and work he did for all those years to be proven only a stopgap measure ? Well, yes ( more than half-expected ) and no. I still find myself going back to those needledrops, more out of nostalgia than anything, though I do agree with the good Doctor's initial assessment (and I assume he was referring mainly to the mono remasters), that they are indeed superior. I haven't bothered tracking down anything that is possibly better than the 2009 remasters because I am satisfied with them and my music collecting habits have taken me into other realms of late.
Here you go: Exactly what is wrong with the 1987 Beatles CD's? Beatles "Revolver" misaligned tape question Examples of pages of Steve Hoffman Music Forum posters, expressing their thoughts of the 1987 discs, BEFORE the 2009 remasters came along. Several posters are still active on the forum to this day. The threads says a lot about how a mindset can suddenly be changed when it's all about being a hipster-purist on a music forum and you will have to change your opinion because all others do...
The mono versions are better for mixing songs from different albums . They seem to have the same volume levels.
Interesting comment, to say the least! I'm quite new here so I'm not sure if your last sentence is laced with cynicism/disillusionment, or is proper stern-advice/warning ! (... or neither of those two). Guess I'll have to read the thread you linked to find out! Cheers !
What about it exactly? In the first thread some people say the 1987 CD's are bad and some say they're OK. The ones who claimed back then that the 1987 cd's suck can very well be the ones who now praise the 2009 cd's and vica versa. Or is there anyone particular you caught "red-handed"? Ondra
I got the mono box and eventually all the stereo remasters. I kept the 80s CDs of Revolver to the end after reading extensively (on this forum mostly).
Nope. They stink. They are narrowed, over-EQ'd, there is spot NR all over the place, and they have digitally removed things they consider anomolies. The original CD's suffer from none of these problems, as arguably mediocre as they are. The 2009's also used the 1987 remixes of "Rubber Soul" and "Help" which was a stupid idea. And regardless, the original stereo mixes on the mono box suffer from the same mastering tomfoolery as the remixes. Get the first 4 albums if you are desperate to have them in stereo. The rest aren't anything great, and there are much better alternatives.
Yeah... how about they're all good, they're great.... only the original of the first four sucked. the 2009s are fine.
Doubtful ...the forum members here consider the Beatles mostly “has been’s” from the mostly forgotten vinyl era of music.
Because it's not about the recording, it's about the mixing. When we're paying for something that is supposedly remastered or remixed, it should sound similar to stuff being released today, otherwise what's the point since it'll still sound dated. If you're judging the original releases than I agree, but for remixes and remasters I think it's a fair thing to expect great things. That's just how I feel anyway. As I always state, I don't actually know anything about music production and only just started caring about how my music sounds recently, so I'd take my opinion lightly
I'm not an audiophile so all I can say is they sound good to me, mono and stereo sets. Great packaging as well.
They are "fine" if you don't mind a narrowed stereo image, noise reduction and heavily manipulated EQ. Don't be surprised if there is some dissent.
I’d love to get some ‘87 CD’s, issue is that I’ma digital kind of guy and as I’m sure you know digital favours the very latest versions of things. It’s a shame the ‘87’s weren’t released officially digitally. I’d get the CD’s except of course stores are similar. I’ve only ever seen 2009 remastered versions.
IMO don’t get the 87 cd’s. They don’t sound as good as the flawed 2009 Stereo Remasters. The 2009 Mono cd Box is the one to get. Hopefully, Apple Corps will remix the stereo albums in future. Ideally, in the same style as the Yellow Submarine Songtrack.
Yeah, that post was a jumble. I tend to do that. What I was trying to say is I'd love to get the '87 versions except it was never released digitally and it's not in any nearby stores so I can't. Shame. That Songtrack is amazing. I was blown away when I first heard it. I actually liked Only a Northern Song, which before was the only Beatles song I hadn't liked. Might buy it soon.
I always liked it. It is a bit dull sounding, though. Still better than Help! though which sounds like garbage.
