Beatles 1 CD (2000 versus 2011)

Stuck with Ebbetts for the AHDN CD.

 

10-4 on the Ebbetts. Sometimes I go back to those simply because it sounds proper to how I've always heard Beatles material. Not necessarily the absolute "best" quality because that's very subjective, but it most certainly does the job in more than only HDN.

 

These Beatles guys are awesome

 

you don't find it a little loudified?

 

Indeed..that's how we respect each others opinions and we all have different listening choices. Cool beans...

 

Not particularly. No.

 

OK, thanks...

 

Word...

 

How do you mean the original tape? There's the orignal single version with Ringo on the drums (master tape trashed, needledropped since) and the Andy White version (on the LP and singles pressed from 1963 onward). I don't know if the revised LMD single used a different tape from the LP master (as in raw master without compression and EQ added to the LP tracks) or if it was a straight copy thereof.

 

My understanding is that the original tape of the Andy White version was copied and subjected to additional post-production in order to make it sound similar to the newly recorded album tracks. It's this copy that has always been used for reissues with the exception of the original "1" album, which used the unaltered original master tape and is, apart from being free from that post-production, a generation less. A pit then, that it was so badly remastered.

 

When I look back I actually had more fun listening and learning to the original Capital stuff in the 60's on ****ty record players. All the great discoveries about the Beatles and their recordings were made then and there dispite the sonic drawbacks...

 

Most people will probably disagree but I prefer the 2000 remaster over the 2009. The best example as to why lies in the Abbey Road tracks, Come Together and Something. I found the 2009 remaster of Abbey Road to be a bit of a disappointment , overall, in terms of hiss they didn't do anything about. On the 2000 version of "1" the hiss on both Something and Come Together is significantly less than on the '09 version and all the tracks, throughout, have a tighter sound to them which may be due to compression many purists are also against. But I find that the 2000 remasters of these singles also have a punchier, cleaner sound than the '09 versions.

 

Even when heard playing through the window of another house 3 doors down, during a thunderstorm while I am watching CNN full blast with Don Lemon crying like a girl, the 2000 CD sounds like crap. On the other hand I REALLY like the 1999 Yellow Submarine Songtrack. They centered the vocals on some songs that originally had them panned hard right, and they took some excessive reverb out on songs like Lucy In The Sky.

 

Yellow submarine Songtrack has REMIXED versions of all the songs as opposed to simply remastered. I think we agree that if the entire Beatles catalog underwent such treatment it would not be a bad thing by any means.

 

I totally agree. I think they should start with Rubber Soul.

 

They're saving that for the next big (re-)release! Just listen to 'All You Need Is Love' on the 'Love' album and you'll see just what is possible if they ever venture back to the multi-tracks - saying that, if god forbid they did something akin to The Doors 40th remix debacle, I'd rather stick with the original mixes!

 

All You Need Is Love, A Day In The Life and Walrus are aural revelations on LOVE. I'm not sure remixing would be worth the "difference" with the much earlier material but as SCATTERBRANE said in his post, everything from Rubber Soul onward would be a beautiful thing.

I can't understand why so many people are actually against remixing The Beatles; especially those who are continually on the lookout for the best possible sounding versions of their favorite music. Yellow Submarine Songtrack, let It be...naked and LOVE are all examples how this music can be taken to a whole other level, sonically. Rather than "hurt" the integrity" of the music, i think it brings out more of what the artists (Beatles or otherwise) may have had originally in mind but weren't able to achieve given time-period limitations.

...and of course, no one's saying to obliterate the original mixes..but to keep them alongside tastefully done remixed versions sounding better than ever.

 

Because a lot of people think the first two instances of remixing on your list sound pretty bad.

Might as well add the Anthology series to that as well.

 

The Anthology remixes of Taxman as well as The End from Abbey Road (excluding John's initial guitar noodling) blow the original mixes away, in my opinion. And then there's Got To Get You Into My Life (from the actual movie, not the CD's)...the drums come to life as never before. Listen to the latter half of Good Night as the orchestrations are brought in...they sound cleaner, fuller and richer than on any remaster of The White Album. Likewise the brought-in ending for here There and Everywhere...those "oooh's" never sounded so lush and the rhythm guitar has a sharp, rounded presence that can't be matched on the original album. Again, just my own ears talking.

 

I love the 2000 version because it sounds as wonderfully crappy as the AM radio on my mom's 1965 Ford Falcon, which is how I remember these songs. Others may judge by a different standard.

 

Forget your DR values and whatever else you want to use it`s ears that count and to these ears the 2011 remaster wins.