So now the 2017 mono is better ? Wich one do I keep on my media-player now for fox sake ? Can somebody compare the 2 discs to an original vinyl sound-wise ?
I found that my rips of the 2014 and 67 against the 2017 CD had less bass, but they were done with the AT440MLb, which is a very bright cart, so it may be a balance thing. I might try ripping a track with a less bright cart and see if it tips the perceived balance more towards the bottom end.
Halfway correct. It's always the OOP Japanese edition that sounds best. And the obi better be included in your hostage-sum secondhand purchase!
I`ve said it before put the album on, press play and bloody enjoy instead of winding yourselves up listening for faults that may not be there. You guys are the hypochondriacs of sound.
No, hypochondriacs make stuff up about something that isnt there. Actually caring about what something sounds like is a big part of this forum. Use to be YOU were the weird one. Not those that delve into sound quality.
Yeah probably. I can't do it at the moment, but I think you can see that the unaltered 2017 would have been louder when the peak levels are matched.
Just an assumption: Mono CD 2009 = aiming to recreate the 1967 vinyl EQ, wich was altered before pressing from the master tape (even though the tape was send with the note "transfer flat!", they felt the need to.) Mono CD 2017 = This is what is on the master tape. The source. No further work done to it.
What's Disc 4 then? I always thought the 2009 monos (as good as they are) had a bit too much mids, and were possibly EQ'd that way.
Not really. If there wasnt anything wrong with the sq, then that would prove his point. But there is many times. His was hyperbole perhaps. But not the truth.
Pretty much anything is going to look more dynamic with more peaks if you apply a 100hz high pass filter to it. But I confirmed by looking at the graphs that such an extreme filter was not applied to the 2009. I used EQ match in izotope in my testes so that only the actual EQ difference between the two was adjusted for. It does look like maybe a high pass filter was applied to the 2009, but much lower, like maybe 40hz. I tried that and it made basically no difference to the look of the waveform. I even then ran the EQ match after the filter (even though the match would compensate for the filter) and still not much difference. I believe something odd happened with most tracks on the mono disc. They don't look natural. I can't believe that's how a proper raw tape transfer should look.
I'm not disagreeing with you per se, but there is a fair amount of dialogue on this forum that boils down purely to perception, or perceived differences, nearly all of which falls in this hazy area beyond the bounds of metrics or science. Not necessarily the case with this Pepper remix/reissue, but people do tend to hear (or not near) what they want to.
The 2017 mono sounds better to my ears. Always thought the 2009 mono box set sounded a bit too in-your-face. Won't be listening to the 2009 CD anymore.
Last night I read this on the Penny Lane promo sounding so bad. I assume others have seen this. Does this sound accurate? 19. Penny Lane [Capitol Records U.S. Promo Single - Mono Mix] New- This is RM11 although no slate is available, it’s similar to RM10 which circulates in perfect quality and features the extra piccolo trumpet at the end. This RM11 comes from an acetate and despite what people have commented, the quality is pretty decent considering this was also a lost acetate and the original mix is no longer at the Abbey Road Studios. Better to have RM11 rather than having the same version already on bootlegs and many other releases (RM10). The Daily Beatle
That's not what someone with an 80s counterfeit is saying. He says he matched the dropouts and a click to it, which aren't on the real promo.
Here's the relevant post Wow. It's riddled with dropouts and... Hmmm.... hang on.... [Digs out the counterfeit promo 45 he bought in 1982 and puts it on the turntable] Oh, good lord. They actually sourced this track from the early '80s counterfeit promo 45! Those dropouts are in the left channel of the fake 45; the level of the right channel drops for a spell. The original promo 45 was mono, of course, but the poor quality tape transfer on the fake copy left a lot to be desired. What Capitol did for the SD Edition was to copy the left channel of the counterfeit 45 to both channels and kick up the high end a smidgen. That tick near the end of the fade is exactly where it is on the counterfeit. The wave form of the SD Edition track also matches the fake. For an expensive, super deluxe edition of one of the greatest albums of all time, this is the best they could do? Disgraceful. At least Dr. Ebbetts used a mint Remix 11 U.S. promo 45 years ago, and it beats the pants off of this sorry "official" needledrop of a counterfeit needledrop. If Capitol was going to have to depend on an unofficial source, they sure picked the wrong one. from here Top 40 Music on Compact Disc: Beatles-"Penny Lane"
Either way, I don't know how those involved didn't hear this and say "This sounds awful. We need to seek out a better source". So even if Capital did send them this, I still consider it a major **** up by Apple.
If I do "out of phase stereo" on the mono album tracks of the 2017 version, the result is not complete silence, but a lot of quiet artifacts. I remember people said that 1987 mono first four CDs had the same issue. However, if I do the same to the "bonus" mono mixes (tracks 16, 17, 18, even 19), they result in clean silence. Anybody has info on why is it so with this "new" mono transfer?