The Beatles Stereo Vinyl Box Set: advice

Read the fine print at the bottom on back of box. It will tell you where set was made, either USA or EU.

 

Are you really sure you want this. I convinced my self I did but found it so disappointing (digital) I sold it.
The mono box on the other hand is a real winner!
Gary

 

No, not at all sure

 

No.

 

A better turntable will help with issues of rumble, wow & flutter, but not at all with issues of linear speed degradation, and only negligibly with cross-talk. In the case of surface noise, if the better turntable does a better job of playing the vinyl grooves, it will as well do a better job of bringing out the surface noise for all to hear. If the LP is digitally mastered, there is no good reason to introduce the problems of vinyl into the process of analog playback.

 

My stereo box is arriving from MD tomorrow. I have the later stereo albums already (to supplement the mono box catalogue) but wanted the full set.

 

My stereo box just purchased from MD is the US version, just FYI.

 

Buy a better cartridge and stylus...sheesh.

 

If a better cartridge/stylus does a better job with the music in the grooves, it will do a better job of bringing out the surface noise for all to hear.

 

You are misunderstanding what I posted. What I am saying is that the new version of the white album (on vinyl) has a less consistent sound than the old vinyl. - not the other way around The original mastering colors the sound of the recording MORE than the new mastering. The main criticism of the recent stereo vinyl is that it is dull and muffled in places where listeners expected some more "excitement". MY point is that the recordings all sound very different owing to the way the album was recorded and that many of the tracks on the recent vinyl don't fit the impression some listeners have of how they SHOULD sound. The feel the recording should sound the way they did on vinyl in 1968. That is fine - however, this mastering is unique in that it is the only mastering that leaves the disparate recordings in their original "uneven" state and offer the listener an insight as to what is on the master tape. Hearing the two variations, it becomes clear that a lot of the hot, brittle and aggresive tone of the white album is not in the recordings themselves, but in the mastering. It makes things cohesive and lends a sonic signature to the entire affair, but it is a step removed from what was mixed.

Your impression of the way the various masterings of the white album sound is not consistent with my own... style wise, WA is all over the place - eclectic and a favorite. Hearing the new version of the vinyl was an ear opener for me. It changed my perception of some of the recordings because the recording are tonally more different than I expected - I am used to what's been around for 50 years too. I think the originals sound great - but I now feel like I understand the "truth" of these recordings better - even if it produces a less cohesive listening experience . I can also, perhaps, potentially understand why Capitol was screwing around with it (Harrison interceded during his visit to the USA in 1968). My bet is they were tryng to address the same issue (even out the sound), albeit in a way that Harrison found objectionable.

Do you have the Hendrix box set "West Coast Seattle Boy"? It's got tracks from the "Are You Experienced" album in stereo. It lays bare the limitations of the recordings - a pretty extreme difference to the mono versions of the songs we are all familiar with. I'm not saying they are a better way of hearing those songs, but they inform you more than the "Mush" that the traditional versions do. That said, you may wish to hear the originals because they feel solid and cohesive. Same can be said for some of the stereo Stones stuff on the London Hot Rocks CDs. The mono may be a better listen, but you can learn more about the recordings from the stereo - even if it is sometimes weak and diffuse sounding.

If you're a fan of the Beatles recording and enamored with the way they worked, then you've GOTTA have the new WA vinyl. If you're listening for fun, do what you want. I do. I didin't throw out my old copies just because this one came out. And BTW, I don't think the difference is all that radical a departure from the original - it certainly much closer than the examples I cited above.

 

Yes. Get it. I get lost in this box several times a year. Because life is too short and the Beatles provide so much pleasure, I'm not going to explain why these "digitally sourced" LPs are just smashing and will provide hours and hours of enjoyment, which they will, from the sound to the record covers to the fat book. They just will. Buy with confidence, if you haven't already, and enjoy.

 

For those who have bought this set from Music Direct, have you had any issues with your set? I'm thinking about buying one from Music Direct.

 

Have only gotten through Please Please Me so far, which was a perfect pressing and sounded lovely.

 

That's good to know. Thank you!

 

I will say this - with the right cart - these sound good. Are they the best? No. But they're not terrible by any means. Better than US Capitols IMO. So, if that's all you have - these are an improvement, yes.

Edit: Yes - I can say with a brighter cart - can reconfirm some of these sound awesome.

 

BFS on the other hand is quite noisy, even after a VPI.

Sound is nice though.

 

Bummer. I appreciate your feedback on these albums. Would love to hear more when/if you have the time.

 

Got through the first four and only had some noise on one. The rest were 100% perfect.

I am loving these.

 

But is this completely accurate? IIRC there were threads here pointing out that the digital processing path for the stereo remasters at one point was down-sampled to 16 bits and then back up to 24. If that is true, this is essentially a CD master with less compression.
Anyone have this info on the tip of their tongue?

 

According to Sean Magee, they used the unlimited 24-bit files before they were downsampled to 16-bit and limited for CD.

 

I'm searching for the forum where this was discussed. Needle in a haystack.
I recall that what you're saying is true, but in the middle of the path they downsampled. If I find it I'll post it.

 

You'll find that to be quite the opposite but don't ask apples from the orange tree. If you play a trashy LP it will remain trashy.

 

It was 24 bit until the final step. More here.

 

Thank u sir.
But this is describing the CD path ( I read tbe PDF also). Do you know how the vinyl path differed? Sounds like they ideally would have had 24 bits on the dat instead of 24.

 

Quote from Sean Magee about the 2012 remasters: "Not cut from USB stick. 24/44.1 no limiting...the usb had limiting."

I assume this means after the analog equalization but before the limiting and noise shaping to 16 bit.