Songs on Sgt Pepper Most Improved By 2017 Remix?

If I am imagining all of this I am in seriousn trouble.

I felt the same way when most of the Hoffman's kept insisting that the volcals and string quartet of the remixed Eleanor Rigby (Yellow Submarine Songbook) was out of sync. I kept playing that track over and over again but I couldn't hear it. But some did. At first I thought they were fantasizing but I came to the mature conclusion that just because I couldn't hear it didn't mean it wasn't there. Same with the echo on the remixes of "Help!" And "Rubber Soul." For years I couldn't hear any echo (the studio term is 'delay') and I thought they were mistaken. And then one day I heard it. There it was as bold as brass. How could I have missed it all these years?

I am not some negative Nancy who hates remixes. I love remixes. Can't get enough of them. I bought Sgt. Pepper last week, popped it into my Moon CD-1 (260D), put on my 555 cans and hit play. I was in love. Every song was an improvement. He took some big risks and some of them played off. Lucy In The Sky - Giles used heavy automation of the stereo panning to make the harpsichord track sound like it was in stereo. You will only hear this effect with headphones unless you have an ultra-high-end setup: Every third to every second note of the bar and then back again the harpsichord will go from a bit right to a bit left and back and forth all the way through the song. Put it simply imagine you are mixing "Lucy In The Sky" and every few notes you panned the harpsichord track a bit left and then quickly pan it to the right again. You did this all through the song. You did it so fast and perfectly timed that no one knew you were doing it. That is what Giles Martin did but through automation in Pro Tools. I have never heard this trick pulled off before..Not well anyway. Brillant..Bloody brillant.

I have been working in my uncle's recording studio for the last ten years and I have been recording/mixing my own music since the mid-nineties.

Everything was great until the beginning of "Good Morning Good Morning." At first I thought something was wrong with my CD player or the CD. I could hear the wierd doubling effect on the bass and drums right away.
What is this effect? You hear a horn track on one side of the mix. You will also hear a delay of the track on the other side. The effect send is so loud on this track that it gives the impression of almost double tracked horns. It is a slight delay. This is the similar delay time that is used to create the ADT. You can hear it on the "Good Morning" volcals as well. Unless they are double tracked. Are they? He even put it on the rhythm track. Remember this is not typical echo or a reverb that you are used to hearing. You have a slight delay and you put it over the rhythm track. It will make it sound bigger. I have created this very effect in the studio. It's easy enough: Just a slight delay. The effect return channel panned to the center, turn up the effect send loud enough and ka-boom. The band sounds really good right? Can't pinpoint what it is right? It's a slight delay. I don't know if the effect send here is postfader or prefader. But to the trained studio ear it's very recognizable as a slight delay. Again it is through headphones that all of this can be heard.

Gee, you might have a point. I might be the only person hearing this!

All those tracks were recorded dry. I hear Good Morning volcals and horns on both sides at the same time as if they are 2 tracks of horns and 2 tracks of 'good morning' volcals. You may hear it as just a sense of space.

Give the original 1967 stereo mix of Good Morning Good Morning a listen. Every track is as dry as a bone.

 

P

I wish I could love the song.

 

Thanks for the response .
I'm not anywhere near a sound system to check any of this out at the moment.

I did immediately hear the out of sync "Eleanor Rigby" the very first time I listened to it though.

 

I voted When I'm 64 and I can't believe there are so little responses to support this. Could be it was the easiest one to do as there wasn't much to have to mess with. Absolutely beautiful "live", open presentation. I don't much care for the rest of the album's re-mixes but bless those that are enjoying them....

 

THAT'S funny...

 

The mono or stereo?

Or did the mono even have it?

 

the 2017 re-mix..you'll think they are right in the room falling all over the place.....

 

Both had it.

 

Yes both the mono and the (superior) stereo mix had the run out groove.

 

Since you brought it up, which version / media / mastering / mix of DSOTM has the best sound stage in 2-channel? There are probably 37 threads that argue about which is the best DSOTM but I'm lazy...

 

The best version is the 2011 remaster. Why? Because I say so. (sarcasm guys) Seriously though. I have heard the 1985, M.F.S.L (copy) 1988, and the recent one. The 2011 has the most mo-jo in it. Unlike The Wall. The recent remaster and the 1993 Remaster sound exactly alike to me. Both are some of the best compact disks I have ever heard. Sorry if I appear to be thread jumping here. Not my intention.

The only Dark Side Of The Moon that is a let down is the 1985 mastered version. It's too harsh -Like a lot of CD 's from that period. But even the dreaded '85 compact disk has a good soundstage.

I can understand an artistic comparison between Dark Side Of The Moon & Sgt. Pepper (any version) but to make a sonic comparison between these two albums is ridiculous. Dark Side Of The Moon was recorded on a 2 inch 16 track. Two really. They recorded all the music to one machine and then had to bounce down all the tracks to a second 16 track (with Dolby A this time) making room for all the extra goodies. i.e. running, alarm clocks, old men talking about dying, etc. For example on the song, "Money" Alan Parsons took the 4 tracks of drums and bass track of "Money" and mixed all 5 tracks down to 2 tracks on tape-2. This was done on at least three other songs. Bounced down and the album still sounds amazing. One of the greatest Rock audiophile albums. On vinyl or C.D. Sgt. Pepper was recorded on 1 inch 4 track. The Beatles bounced down a lot. And a lot of the tracks have more than one instrument on them.

Dark Side of The Moon has gated, stereo drums on every song. Sgt. Pepper only has mono drums. Don't get me wrong, the drum sound on Pepper (remix or other) is amazing but it does not have the same stereo soundstage as the drums on Dark Side Of The Moon. And if anything Giles Martin has narrowed the sound stage compared to the original stereo mix. Any mastered version of the Pink Floyd classic has no compression or limiting on it. Unfortunately (and I hate to admit it) the remix of Pepper has compression on it. It is not slammed but it is perhaps more than was necessary - loud. The stereo Sgt. Pepper of 1987 or 2009 has no compression on it. Except for the 1 db or so increase with the limiter only acting on transient peaks for the 2009 Remastered stereo CD.

 

Thanks! (I have a 1973 vinyl copy and the 1993 XX Anniv edition on CD in the black box).

Okay folks, you can have your Sgt. Pepper thread back now.

 

So you think it's okay to derail a thread on an entirely different topic (and ask people to rewrite what they've already written) simply because you're too lazy to do a search? Nice....

 

I just recently heard the remix. It's fun to listen through a new window, but I'm not crazy about it.

I loved my wife's comment. She said that she listened to the album endlessly as a teenager. The new mix is like, "Drinking chocolate milk from a crystal goblet. It's too polished."

'nuf said.

 

She's Leaving Home
Within You, Without You
Being For The Benefit Of Mr Kite

 

I *do* like the new mix but that's a great analogy.

 

You cannot improve on perfection. The album is perfect as it was. By the way, this is true for their entire catalog.

 

"None" should be an option

 

I like it too... I've listened to it many times.

 

The greatest "wow" effect was Fixing a Hole, that balance, those clear backing vocals...
The other two I voted for were Getting Better and Lovely Rita.

Well, the definitive version for me is the mono mix, but the 1967 stereo mix was far from perfect. It was a rush job in which the Beatles took no part, and which contains several mistakes.
No disrespect, but that kind of exaggerated praise seems to emerge from mythologizing something because of its vintage status. If the new remix had come out in 1967, and the old mix in 2017, people would smash it to pieces (and with good reason): "Why does he pan the voices around? Why are the drums on the left? Why is it so unbalanced?"

 

And yet they sold millions of records. It seems to me that no one knew what they were doing when they did the original mixes. Not just the BEATLES, but every group that is out there. How many time are we going to get improved Led Zeppelin albums, of improved mixes of the doors?

 

"None" is an option, Don't vote.

 

We can agree on Led Zeppelin, since they only mixed in stereo. But in the case of the Beatles, you have to differentiate: until the White Album, the mono mixes were the definitive piece of work for them. Mono sold much more than stereo. When they started attending mixes, they only attended the mono ones. The stereos were made in a rush, without the Beatles' presence (sometimes even George Martin didn't attend) and many times with glaring mistakes.

So if someone said they were going to remix the Beatles' records in mono, I would say "What's the point? The originals are great as they are, the Beatles wanted them like that, no need to touch them". I don't have the same reverence for the stereos, though. I like some of them, but they don't represent the Beatles' intent. The Pepper remix is much closer to the Beatles' idea of the album (as expressed in the mono mix) than the original stereo.

 

I wanted to choose all of them! Getting Better is one of the best. The vocals are right up front. Love it!

 

Sooooo many great choices... but... my votes went to...
~"Within You Without You"
~"Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds"
~"Fixing A Hole"