Beatles Downloads - Another clue for you all?

Forget about the other CDs out there - will these remasters sound as good as a tube cut yellow and black Parlophone original?

I can think of one mastering engineer who could achieve that - but apparently he hasn't been asked to work on the Beatles remasters

There is no excuse in the world today to make reissues sound inferior to the way they did 40 years ago - however, modern mastering techniques involving DSP have ensured that this is the case with practically every release since the early 90s.

If you are happy with the sound of modern CDs such as LOVE then you will probably be happy with the remasters. If you prefer your re-issues of 40 year old masters to sound like analogue tapes then, based on the evidence of the last 15 or so years of remastering from the major labels, you will be disappointed.

 

Or simply inferior to any japanese bootleg needle drop.

However I beg to differ, on my system, when I do a blind demo of an A/B with say, "Hard day's night" on the red CD comp and the "First Four in Stereo", everyone in the room, including their wifeys or GF who don't give a toss about music, agrees that the japanese boot sounds better (and most of them thought that the red one was actually the bootleg hahaha!).

The only thing I say first is that one is a bootleg made from a vinyl, and the other the official artefact.

 

It's not quite fair to use a lifeless, sterile, poorly-transferred mono cut from the official CD to a very nice-sounding STEREO mix of the same song. That being said, an original y/b parlophone mono needledrop sounds infinitely better than the mono mix on the CD. Ron

 

Hard Day's Night is in stereo on the official Red comp.

 

That it is... I misread the post. But I don't think the stereo mix of AHDN on 1962-1966 is inferior to the same mix on the First Four In Stereo boot. A slight narrowing of the stereo image and a bit higher in volume, but seriously, it's not appreciably different, IMO. Ron

 

Yes, and the Mals of this forum are convinced that that will ALWAYS be the case, no matter how the remasters are done.

Doesn't that beg the argument about whether or not it's possible for a CD to ever sound as good as vinyl?

 

Well, a well made needledrop from an LP is pretty damn close - if you have the master tapes you could make a CD sound that sounded better than the vinyl in my opinion.

DCC managed to do this regularly.

 

Another clue? Beetle re-emerges after 60 years

 

The beetles were last recorded at Chailey Common, Sussex in 1948.

Now there's a 78 I'd like to get my hands on. Pre-teen beetles!!

OK, I'm leaving now...

 

The best sound I've heard has been from CD; "redbook" is a miraculous design - it's careless/clueless/grasping hominids who've largely betrayed the mass possibilities of great CD sound. Unfortunately for the Beatles' catalogue, I'd think that accelerating mastertape deterioration (and the wrong engineers being involved) will prevent us from ever hearing that sort of sound on planned(?) reissue Beatles CDs. I'd be happy to be proved wrong, though!

 

That's the reason I used both of those for blind tests. On my gear, people invariably says the boot is better, more life, atmosphere, feeling that the band is playing in the room, while the other sounds dead, with the band playing in distance. It's not about the differences in the mixes, just the way it sounds if played in a big room.

Reason why, for example, you can't really put the red album version on in a party as a DJ, (or you will kill the party atmosphere), but will put on the boot one, and get people saying "wow, Beatles, cool DJ !". It's all in the mastering.

 

This is all so subjective my friend. Depending on room size, gear, loudness levels. I did the same test with a musician friend (not a big Beatles fan) in my listening evironment (a modified basement studio). To be fair, I modified the levels some, and yes, I had to lower the official CD a notch or two, but all other settings were identical... not EQ tweaking, just played the official CD and the stereo boot. Here's his thoughts on some selected tracks.... Oh yeah, CD1 is the official CD; CD2 the boot.

Love Me Do
Bill: Are you trying to trick me?
Ron: Huh?
Bill: Neither one is stereo.
Ron: Oh yea, there's no stereo master for this song.
Bill: Why not?
Ron: Because, the UK only released mono singles then.... Ahhh, nevermind. Which CD sounds better?
Bill: I like the acoustic guitar on CD1. The vocals are pretty clear. CD2 sounds muffled.

Can't Buy Me Love
Bill: Wow, damn good tune, I've heard it before of course, but this is very powerful. 1965?
Ron: No, Feb 1964
Bill: Damn, that's rocking sh&% for '64
Ron: The sound Bill
Bill: CD 2 sounds fuller, the guitar solo sounds better too. CD1 sounds compressed and a little distorted.

And I Love Her
Bill: Who plays the guitar solo on this one?
Ron: That's George.
Bill: Brilliant stuff.
Ron: Yea, I think it's pretty impressive for a guy who just turned 21
Bill: Wow, very impressive. Triple-tracked vocals? Or is one of them John?
Ron: All Paul. Double and triple-tracked.
Bill: Hands down CD1 is clearly better... open vocals, guitar sounds great. CD2 is ok, but clearly inferior.
I later played him the US mono mix with single and doubletracked vocals, he preferred that one over the stereo

Norwegian Wood
Bill: Sitars? I thought this CD was no later than 1966?
Ron: October 1965
Bill: Damn, they really were ahead of the curve huh?
Ron: We have A LOT of listening to do...
Bill: CD1 sounds great. Everything is open and clean. On CD2 it sounds small, almost too much separation and the acoustic guitar sounds metallic-y (his word, not mine).

So in my clearly unscientific poll the official CD is preferred 3 to 1. This continued throughout the album. Some of the harder rock songs like Ticket To Ride, Day Tripper and Paperback Writer sound better on the boot. While every softer and mid-tempo song were clearly better on the official CD. Ron

 

All the Beatles CDs have been on sale the last few months in the UK (£9 each instead of £16). Red and blue albums are only £13 each (unheard of, normally around £30!)

Play.com is showing Sgt. Pepper CD as 'currently unavailable'. Looks to me like a Pepper 40th anniversary will kick it all off in June !!!

JohnnyH

 

Your second point could be interesting.
As regards the price issue, these CDs have been fluctuating in price for some time now; currently in HMV for example, they're back to normal and next week, they'll probably be on sale again. I wouldn't read anything into this.

 

I don't quite understand why the 40th Pepper anniversary is being touted as such a big deal. After all July sees the 50th anniversary of when Paul met John.

 

Edmund, anniversary dates have always been an important aspect of marketing in the music business. It wouldn't make sense to market something such as the day two people first met. Notable Beatles anniversaries this year:

45th Anniversary
October 1962: Release of their debut single, Love Me Do/PS I love You

40th anniversary
June 1967: Release of Sgt. Pepper
December 1967: Release of Magical Mystery Tour EP

Ron

 

Now that would be a cool anniversary on which to release a new singles box - using original single masters thoughout and not using a stereo deck for the mono transfers!

Unfortunately I think it is as likely to happen as a 78th Anniversary re-issue of this:

 

Hi Ron. I agree with you from a 'marketing point' it makes a lot more sense to tie re-releases in with their own 'special' anniversary dates, however, the 50th anniversary of John and Paul getting together to form what would result in the eventual Beatles, has for me personnaly, more of a wow factor.

 

With all due respect, edmund......

That IS an important "date" in Beatles lore.............unfortunately it was never recorded, or released in ANY format.

Pepper WAS recorded and released. It is considered a fairly important record in popular music history................so I think it may carry a bit more weight, and "wow" factor with regards to a anniversary release..........

 

Well, how many Beatles anniversarys have gone by without anything happen...

The Revolver anniversary to begin with, was last year

 

You know what... part of the performance on "the day John met Paul" , 6 July 1957, WAS recorded. John and the Quarrey Men singing covers of Elvis' Baby Let's Play House and Lonnie Donegan's Putting On the Style. Obviously, the quality is horrible, but it IS historic no doubt. Paul now owns this tape. It SHOULD have been included on Anthology regradless of the sound quality. Ron

 

I can't wait for the deluxe DVD remaster of the Woolton Village Fete performance, with commentary and surround sound!

 

The remasters weren't completed then, there would be nothing new to promote. EMI celebrated the 20th anniversary of Love Me Do in 1982. There was the ridiculous 30th Anniversary set of the White Album in 1998, that only fixed a glitch on Happiness Is A Warm Gun and a few digital tracking errors, no remastering or remixing. Utterly pointless! The official CDs were promoted as a sort of 20th Anniversary of Sgt. Pepper. But you're right, little tie-in with important release dates through the years... really a shame. Ron

 

It was bought by EMI, not Paul.

 

Not according to Doug Sulpy, but he could be mistaken. Ron