Beatles Mono VINYL box set (Part #16)

Damn you, Steve Hoffman Forum. Damn you to hell.

Sometimes forum hype turns out to be just that; hype. But sometimes it's spot on. I have never been into mono, not that I had much in my collection. But when The Beatles mono CD box was released, I succummed and ordered it. After all, the cool kids were doing it.

But truth be told, I never liked the mono CD's. Pepper, which was the poster child for what The Beatles in mono was all about, just never sounded good to me on CD. None of them did. So now, we have the monos on vinyl, and again, all the cool kids were doing it. Not one to learn my lesson, I asked for a few titles for Christmas (Pepper, RS, Revolver, Beatles for Sale).

Not a news flash to those posting in this thread, but for the monos on vinyl, the hype is warranted. Wow, just wow. Finally sitting down for a listen this evening, and I am floored. RS and For Sale sounded great, and I have not yet spun Revolver, but holy crap, does Pepper sound good. Amazingly good. Within You Without You is simply holographic. The tonality, image depth, dynamics....it's all there. Macca's bass is a revelation.

So, now I need to go back to Elusive Disc and order more. Too late to buy the box, but Help, MMT, AHDN, and the Mono Masters are now on the way. So again, damn you Steve Hoffman Forum for causing me to spend even more money on music that I have already owned in various forms for close to 40 freaking years.

 

Q

Well with it IMHO

 

You can't really compare the stereo and the mono mixes because they are distance. The stereo mixes do tend to be more dynamic. From a mere visceral perspective, I can understand you feeling that way.

But you are talking about two different mixes, sometimes two different performances. More importantly, the mono mixes were carefully put together and layered so that the listeners would hear exactly what the musicians and engineer intended. The stereo mixes tended to be more quickly put together, particularly with the earlier albums, not to mention the extreme left/right of the stereo mixes making them unnatural in presentation.

 

What you're likely hearing in the originals is an upper mid-range boost. It makes them sound more immediate. They were also mastered using tubes whereas the new ones were mastered with solid state. I think the new ones are more accurate, and the bass on the new ones is more extended.

 

Revolver is one of the albums I don't ever care to hear again in stereo. Oh well.

 

Right but, I feel that the Please Please Me, masters were damaged somehow. I actually heard that that some of the adhesive from splicing leaked onto the master tape.

 

Yes, with PPM and Mono Masters, for different reasons, they had to create a 2nd generation master. They still sound fantastic.

 

I bought them separately; too much extra money for the book.

 

Hi all,

I am new to this forum and what a way to kick things off. Well I am not trying to offend anyone or hurt any feelings, I am just providing an unbiased review of what I heard when I played my copy of the 2014 Beatles on mono 3 LP Mono Masters record and to ask a few questions about it that others with more knowledge may be able to answer.

Let me start off by saying that I have a top notch vinyl playback system, an entire tube electronic front end, excellent phono stage/ moving coil cartridge/turntable etc...I dont bring this up to brag, I mention it only to highlight that I am listening on a system capable of resolving low level detail.

The Review:

1. The Reviewers - This record has received high praise. In my humble opinion that praise is completely unwarranted. I rarely follow other reviewers blindly as I have found that even the ones that appear to be the most capable and reputable have their compasses offset frequently, which ultimately leads to disappointment and incorrect expectations. Reading Michael Fremer's review of this set where it got a 10/10 on all counts music + sound lead me to believe that I would be getting something in the area of the absolute sound as far as quality goes. Don't get me wrong, Mikey is good for this hobby and I have been enjoying his material for as long as I can remeber, but I think he is off in the case. Well, I have found that this is not the case. Looking in countless other places for reviews, there is an overwhelming majority of people praising this record. To me, it appears that an exception has been made, perhaps on the basis of nostalgia, personal feelings about the music, the fact that the tapes are about 50 years old or whatever other excuses one can muster. Objectivity has gone out the window in a way that is analogous to the disclaimer or note to collectors in the goldmine book. Just becuase it is rare/old/been through a war does not change the grading scheme. NM is NM is NM and VG is VG is VG, it is not NM even though it has some scratches just because it is rare. Similarly these records do not have a 10/10 on sound becuase they sound better than other crap pressings, or because it is old, or becuase you love the Beatles.

2. Signal Path - From Tapes, but apparently they are sourced from second gen copies according to Fremer. This is a red flag. the article says, " Don't worry it doesnt impact the sound". Now, on what planet has this ever been true. I think the tapes are trashed, the copies are half trashed which still makes them trashed to me. Apparently they are cut using a completely analog signal path. This was great news to me and to many other fans given the backlash after the first digitally mastered releases from 2012. I do not like being tricked into buying digital vinyl, say no to the digital-transfer or buy the cd. Why pay vinyl prices for an ultimately digital medium, but that discussion is for another day. However, whenever I see cut from the original master tapes I cant help but think to myself isnt EVRERYTHING cut from those tapes. The details of the cutting sessions are absent, a digital loopback head kills the all analog bit with ease in many cases at the benefit of convenience, but I am willing to accept what is written on the cover regarding an all analog signal path for now.

3. Quality - There are many complaints out there on the interwebs with regard to quality issues. Warps, scratches, skips, rough edges with loose vinyl, off center holes, center holes with stray rough vinyl bits (you know, the ones that break off and created nice arc scratches across your LPs when they are taken out of their sleeves). My copy, was not warped. The edges were a little rough as was the center hole, but not bad all in all. I did experience skips in many places, especially on Hey Jude. I had to make absolutely certain that my stylus was not the cause of this issue. I put on several other hard to crack passages and my torture test LPs and it tracked just fine. It is the LP, and I am sorry to report that the quality is not great. This might not be a universal thing, I am merely reporting my findings.

4. The Sound - Let me start by saying I am not a huge Bealtes guy, but I have grown to like the band quite a bit and I myself get nostalgic when hearing their music. I do not have a huge collection of Beatles plates for comparisons sake but I do have a good set of ears, a critical mind, and some UK first and German Presses. Without discussing any comparison, if I were to rate anything I have heard form the Beatles over my life time of listening to records and high end systems I would say they fall in the category of 3/10-8/10, I have yet to hear anything that I would put a 10/10 grade on from that band. I do not care if it is a Mono Red Japanese press, a UK first, MFSL reissue, or otherwise. This LP sounded terrible, plain and simple. Sorry guys, I wanted it to sound great but it does not. It is VERY Essy, Distorted, and lacks any kind of real detail that I was expecting. The loud passages are simply blown out and intolerable. Reviewers and fellow vinyl addicts are so critical under normal circumstances, but it seems like this record just got a pass. There are companies out there ( Analogue Productions, Speakers Corner, Music Matters, ORG, the late Classic Records...) that put out material from a full analog signal chain, with first gen masters, and the best mastering engineers in the world working hard to deliver sound that is easily a 9 if not a 10 any day of the week that gets trashed constantly. Vinyl addicts pay an arm and a leg to hear the first UK NM mono of original blue note which can also be a 9 or 10 any day of the week, and when you hear them speak about these albums it is nit pickiness, pissing and moaning yet I have not seen a single complaint about this record since it came out in September. I rate this LP, not by comparing it to any other terrible overly compressed Shmoe stereo trash out there, but rather on its own...ON HOW IT SOUNDS....it hardly pushes a pass 6/10. You can be in love with the music and happy to have it in mono, finally, for not $100+ per record BUT you will not be in love with the sound.

5. My questions -

A) I will be the first to admit that I do not have all the details on sources, sessions, and what have you I would like to know however, what was this release supposed to be, are the album songs cut from the same source as the album or is this a different take all together ? Please forgive my ignorance, and help me understand.

[Side note: The first song I played off this LP was "Hey Jude" I immediately swapped out to my first press UK Blue album, which I have always thought was not so great and it killed this new 2014 mono release in every audible category except the poor stereo separation of course (which is ironic, as i bash this mono set). Popped on the German one which I know is worse than UK and even it was much much much better than the 2014 mono release. Those records are not known to be the greatest representations of "hey Jude" available, and they are off a compilation album! Add to that that they are from the inferior stereo session that the band never cared about etc... Well, they still sound FAR BETTER.]

B) Has anyone else been disappointed with the sound quality or is it just me, am I crazy, what are you guys hearing really all nostalgia aside?

C) I have not bought a single other album from the 2104 Mono release, as I suspect that I might be very unsatisfied with them. My question is, am I in for disappointment with the other 10 albums in the set? Has anyone compared them to first presses mono or stereo ( UK/Jap/Germ)? Has anyone felt disappointed with the mono masters 3 LP set but happy with the other albums in the set?

Well, that was long and I am tired and do not feel like editing. One take for this review/question session, hope it is comprehensible and that it does not put you to sleep. I will be looking forward to hearing some of your responses.

 

What Records UK have the box for £275 (unless they've since sold out...)

 

Is the version of Hey Jude you are comparing with on the blue album not the stereo mix? Have you heard the mono mixes of the tracks on the mono mixes before? Obviously I can't hear what you are hearing but in my modest rig this LP sounds fine.

The Mono Masters LP obviously didn't exist in the 60's so all the 1st gen single mono mix downs had to be compiled on to a compilation reel to be cut to vinyl, common practice for a compilation. Hence how you hearing it's sourced from a second gen source.

 

Well Archie, i've read your lengthy review & in my opinion you are basing your whole review on a faulty product. You state in no 3, "It skips in Many places, especially on Hey Jude". You should be returning it to wherever you bought it from.

I've just played my copy of The Mono Masters all the way through on my less than two years old music system that I paid a lot of money for, & I've heard no skips or any other faults, which is as it should be.

In No 2 Signal Path, you use the word Trashed three times, now to me if something is trashed then it is unplayable. Don't forget that these tapes are around 50 years old, the music recorded on 2 & 4 track decks, not recorded last week on some 72 track mega deck.

I don't know what you expected to hear from this album, I just think that you are an aural snob.

 

It's mostly just you. The set is amazing

 

“Hey Jude” is a particularly unfortunate choice for a comparison in this case, because it is one of very few examples in the Beatles catalogue of the mono version of a song not being a true mono mix – it’s a “fold-down”. That mono version was made at Abbey Road by combining the two channels of a finished stereo mix into mono, rather than the standard procedure of mixing the four or eight discrete channels on a multi-track tape into a dedicated mono mix.

In addition to that, the stereo mix used for that purpose had been made at another recording studio which utilized totally different tape EQ standards, so the engineers back at Abbey Road had to apply vast amounts of EQ to the recording in order to make it sound acceptable. Still, the mono version sounds muddy, and always has – unlike most other mono mixes of Beatle songs. The released stereo mix (which is not identical to the stereo mix from which the mono was made) is the sonically superior version in this specific case.

 

MM is the wrong album to start with. Start with Pepper or Beatles For sale.

 

No it's a dedicated mono mix, not a fold down

 

No that's wrong: it's not a dedicated mono mix, it is a fold down.
NOT of the released stereo mix, of a different, unreleased stereo mix.

 

3 mono mixes were completed on 8th of August 1968, last of which was the single RM4.

 

Certainly, but all of those were EQ-ed mono mixes made from a NAB stereo mix done at Trident Studios, not from the 8-track tapes.

 

They were all fold downs.

 

I wonder why they used a different mix for the mono fold. As opposed to using the stereo they choosed for the stereo. Perhaps the alternate stereo simply sounded better when folded?

Anyway i always found the Hey Jude to be one of the better White Album period monos.

 

They didn't like the stereo mix and re-did it in 1969/70. So that original stereo mix is still unreleased which would be nice to hear.

 

Ahhh ofcourse. They weren't in need of anything else than a mono for the single in 68. Makes sense.

 

How do you guys like the Hard Days Night? Mine seems a little harsh and trebly . I like the first two before it.

 

My reaction and that of all my friends who have heard it via me or own their own copies is that it is irrefutably indispensable. An embarrassment of aural riches.