Beatles mix variations - WHY?

OK so I used the wrong word at the beginning. I was hoping the meaning would come through. Thanks for the rest of your post.

 

What circumstantial evidence is there that all of the original mixdown masters -- even in situations where there were multiple mixes -- are not still at EMI? It seems to me that the circumstantial evidence supports the opposite.

AFAIK, the original masters for everything that was released in the UK remain at EMI (except for the few early things which were destroyed). In addition, there are plenty of unreleased mixes and takes that have never left EMI -- and many that have subsequently come to light years later via John Barrett, Anthology, etc. So why would one think that EMI would change policy and send original tapes overseas for stuff that was being released elsewhere but wasn't released in the UK? It seems to me that after late '63, the importance of The Beatles' tapes became apparent to the folks at EMI and everything was kept regardless.

 

I have an Apple label pressing of Y&T that has true stereo versions of the three Revolver tracks, that dates from the mid 1970's. So at some point the LP was indeed remastered.

In "I Call Your Name" the edit occurs when John says "I call your(edit)name" right before the solo.


Evan

 

Hi Evan

That's kinda interesting because my first copy was a Apple from around '78 and that didn't. My current copy a mid 70's orange Capitol is the same. I have a true stereo on CD (don't ask how).
I believe part of the reason for this lies in that new masters were cut but at the pressing stage Capitol used whatever stampers they could get their hands on which included the older ones with the Duophonic versions.
The one you know will be true stereo is the Capitol Record Club edition.

Regards,

 

The very existence of these different mixes is one of the delights of being a Beatles fan or collector.

 

I think so, yes. One example:

Code:

E50105     A     I Wanna Hold Your Hand (RS17) (VOCALS RHS BUT GTR IN CENTRE)       M   17 Oct 1963
        (remix)  This Boy (RS15) (VOCALS RHS GTR CENTRE)                            M
           Z     (BOTH TRACKS OF A AVAILABLE)
        (remix)

E56164     Z     I Want To Hold Your Hand (VOCALS CENTRE) (FROM TK17)               B   8 Jun 1965
        (remix)  DEMO MIX OF "THE GIRL CAN'T HELP IT" BY THE FOURMOST ALSO ON TAPE

From John Barret's notes. If a tape didn't exist, it would have []'s around it. Looks like those two still exist, even though they were not issued in the UK.

I'd have to parse through things to see if that holds true for some of the "Capitol" mixes, but...

 

I couldn't agree with you more... same goes for early Who material. The different mixes are wonderful to find and add to a collection. Ron

 

Duh. Why didn't I think of the Barret notes? I would think they would pretty much answer the questions. Thanks.

 

I never said that the UK label didn't keep what they wanted or
what they believe they needed to make additional records...

A straight forward reading of the time line provided in Lewisohn's
book compared with release schedules around the globe make it
obvious that special requests often came in to Abbey Road.
My supposition that tapes ended up missing is based purely
on the fact that they kept repeating what had been done
previously...

The alternate theory (which most seem to subscribe to) is
that they were just flaky and changed their mind often...
or they somehow had this incredible ability to guage
the public thirst for slightly different amounts of EQ
or echo or instrument balance or loop effects for
different markets....

OR

It was also just a fun way to keep us amused
many years after the fact as we chase down
pressing from all over the globe...


As for Barrett's notes... I don't believe they were
compiled DURING the 60s... by the time Barrett was asked
to go through and catalog everthing, it's very possible
that the home office in London could have sent notes around
the globe asking for things back.... simply as a mechanism
to have everything archived in a common location....


I don't really have the interest to go back through Joe Brennan's
web page line by line and cite examples... but that list came
out of discussions Joe and I had on rec.music.beatles and I
am mentioned prominently somewhere in the spot where he
gives credits... but I don't pretend to have his list memorized - LOL

I am quite intrigued to learn that someone recently identified
a vinyl stereo "Yes It Is" that escaped notice previously.
The Heinenken cassette thing never sounded right to me...

I realize it defies LOGIC to send a mix tape - instead of a copy.
(and excuse me if I used the wrong word)

But if you weren't planning to USE the mix - and you knew
you COULD generate another mix without much effort... and
this happened REPEATEDLY - for almost EVERY song where
there is misalignment in how the song was used (single,
EP, LP, greatest hits LP, alternately sequenced LP, etc)
it's not outside the realm of possibility... I don't claim
to have the answer - just a mighty good question for
someone who WAS there...


For what it's worth - I read something recently by someone
who worked on some Nashville material - circa early 60s
(I don't remember the artist - maybe the Everly Brothers)
where there was a comment about how the original
3 track tape was considered "the master"... whereas
most people would call that the session tape - and
a precurser to a stereo master (which by definition
could not have 3 channels)....

 

I just have to add my two-ceents: I've grew up with the stereo version of the 'White Album' and have been listening to it for more than 30 years.
Lately, I've been listening to the MONO version and I caught myself thinking "What a wonderful album ! It's bloody great" as if it was the first time I heard it.
Even today the different mixes makes a difference - even to an old time collector.
That's the beauty of collecting the various mixes.
It took me years to realise and it the difference didn't kick in untill I heard the differnt mixes myself.

 

One brief comment about the Barrett notes and the meaning of
the brackets []


I'm not a recording engineer but I am very familiar with data
and how it can be wrong or misleading or downright confusing.

Case in point... I work for a company that purchased 3,000
"widgets" about 8-10 years back and distributed them across
approximately 800 locations.... (the actual name of the
"widget" is immaterial for the sake of discussion)

About 3 years back, I was handed a spreadsheet that
detailed the location of each "widget" and I was told
to start working with them... only problem was, we
bought way too many "widgets" way back when and
we were only sure about 500 or so of them were being
used...

So it became my job to track down the location of
approximately 2,500 "widgets"... the reason was
the "widgets" were being recalled by the original
manufacturer and we wanted to have all of our
"widgets" fixed as part of the recall...

I quickly found approximately 500 "widgets" that had
become operational - but weren't being tracked
in the spreadsheet as such... about 300 more
"widgets" were found ever so slowly... about
500 of the original 3,000 were "widgets" that
were functionally equivalent - but were purchased
from someone else (and hence couldn't be
sent back to be fixed)... call those 500 "widgets"
a different name... call them "alternowidgets"...


In any case - the basic point here is I don't
trust data... its a great starting point, and
it helps to quickly locate things... but people
aren't usually very good about updating things
that they don't believe are important... in my
case, that corresponds to the approximate
1,000 "widgets" that we have sitting there
waiting to become operational...


My feeling about the bracket thing used by
Barrett is that might represent a tape that
he went looking for and couldn't find...

To assume that ALL tapes - without a bracket
are sitting exactly where they can easily
be located is a leap of faith... especially
for alternate mixes that were subsequently
redone...

Yes - Barrett might have used old data
to generate a new list... but I don't
necessarily believe he located and
listened to every tape that didn't
have a bracket...

If it was an alternate mix - that he
knew wasn't the final mix that EMI-UK
eventually used - he wouldn't really have
a REASON to look for the early mix tape...

Internet bragging rights - excepted



And where exactly do these notes reside
(in the public domain) ???

I went looking for them today on the internet
and all I could find was some discussion about
how small portions of them have leaked out
here and there...

Is there a web-page somewhere that has
a complete set of notes - like the excerpt
that was posted above ????

 

I LOVE that there differences between the mixes! Sometimes two different takes were used for each. For example: the vocals on the true mono version of "Help!" are completely different. I thought Capitol used the US mono 45 mix of "I Feel Fine" for the US Red album? I think that mix is the best of all and it was prepared by George Martin. Love the sound of Lennon's guitar after the solo! The reverb wakes it up quite nicely. What I'd like to know is why did Capitol use the mono mix of "Hello Goodbye" on the Blue album. Let me guess, another fold down? LOL!

 

I've asked this more than once before, but never received a response:

If stereo mixes up through the White album were a low priority usually done w/o the involvement of George Martin, who decided on major changes like slowing down She's Leaving Home or including the "blisters" coda of Helter Skelter?

 

First of all, the stereo mixes were a lower priority and most of them were done by George Martin. Martin produced both mixes of She's Leaving Home, along with Geoff Emerick, so one would assume he made the decision to slow down or speed up the mix. The stereo mix was done 17 April, almost a full month after the mono mix was done... 20 March.

As for Helter Skelter, the stereo mix was done by George Martin on 12 October, but the mono mix was done by Chris Thomas (who produced the session) 17 Sept and he ended the song at 3:36. Martin decided to fade the song back in and added an additional :53 seconds, including Ringo's "I've got blister's on my fingers" comment. Ron

 

I have the green label Record Club issue of "YT" and yes, all three tracks are in true stereo. I have heard an original rainbow label Record Club pressing and it too had the songs in true stereo. My orange label from 1978 has "I'm Only Sleeping" & "Dr. Robert" in duophonic but "And Your Bird Can Sing" is in true stereo. Another orange label in my collection has all three in fake stereo. The back cover has the number "16" on the lower right hand corner (factory?). I believe my green label (stock copy) has all three in fake stereo. I do know that a friend of mine bought one of the very last pressings of the album. It's on the 80's rainbow label and all three tracks were surprisingly in fake stereo. I thought by that time they would have done away with any of the original stampers.

 

It's also a massive pain in the hind end when you're trying to find the definitive or best sounding versions out there.

A different mix with different performances is one thing - trust me, I love the David Frost performance of Revolution, simply because of the live vocals - but things like a record company sticking reverb on it? not so necessary. It's also frustrating from a historical standpoint that the Beatles' music wasn't always treated well - rushed, sloppy mix jobs and such.

 

Because they can.

 

Considering that the 'White Album' was the first Beatle album released only in stereo in the US, I think members of the group took a much more active role in the stereo mixing. This would be the only reasonable explanation for the MASSIVE difference between the two versions of 'Helter Skelter'. The stereo is not just simply a longer fade out/fade in variant of the mono (it edits into a completely separate section of the take). Even George Martin wouldn't take this much liberty, particularly with one "perfectionist" Paul's songs. I'd be shocked if, at least, both Paul and John didn't attend the Oct. 12th mix session (especially since the mono mixing that took place that night, yielded other final/master mixes including John's "Everybody's Got Something To Hide...")...

 

I don't have them, but I think you're right in thinking that they shouldn't be very hard to locate...

 

I think you're right. In the Lewisohn, there's a quote from Ken Scott on this date that sure makes it seem like the Beatles had a hand in those mixes...and many others.

 

I've been wanting to ask this for a while and this thread seems like the appropriate place.

Are the stereo mixes of songs from "Beatles For Sale" that ended up on the Capitol albums identical to the UK stereo mixes?

If not, which ones are different?

 

When The Beatles recorded 'Sgt. Pepper' the mono mixes were the ones they cared about.
Perhaps somebody simply forgot to speed-up "She's Leaving Home" when it was mixed for stereo ...

During the recording of the 'White Album' The Beatles began to find interest in the stereo mixes and "Helter Skelter" probably has the most disparate mono and stereo mixes of any Beatles song.
It might even be that the released mono mix (RM1) was meant to be a rough mix which they later forgot to improve upon for release.
How else to explain the omission of the last minute of the song, including Ringo's infamous "I've got blisters on my fingers!" comment?
In addition, the stereo mix uses Ringo's second drum track sparingly, largely burying it in the left channel, whereas it's prominent in mono.
Some of the "horn" noises heard during the solo in mono are also mixed out in stereo.

 

Yes, they're all the same mixes.

 

...just like on "I'm Only Sleeping", where there are several mix variations of when the backwards guitar comes in. I always found "Blackbird" interesting though...the timing of the bird sound effects isn't the same on the mono & stereo mix (they start earlier on the mono mix).