I would only buy the new mono mix.... if it included the Penny Lane and All You Need is Love singles. After all, "All You Need is Love" was topping the singles charts while Pepper topped the LP charts.
More bass=Less dynamic range. Why don't people get the science of that when they so eagerly will look at a number? I am beginning to think that some posters are highly unwilling to learn this.
I always thought the 09 set sounded lifeless. What ever they did with this new master opens it up just a bit.
Yes, I mentioned that a few days ago. The album is not quite pure mono. SFF is worse. PL is about the same as the album, but the 4 unreleased mixes are pure mono.
Since you're quoting a post which was a reply to mine, I can only assume you're referring to me as one of these people (though neither of these posts mentioned DR numbers). I haven't even looked at the DR numbers for this release and am not judging this release by them. And yes, I understand the significance of bass in what I was discussing. As slane showed, bass adjustment can greatly affect the look of the waveform. The problem is the amount of bass adjustment needed to affect it that much can be seen on a spectral graph and heard when listening and I'm not seeing or hearing this degree of bass difference with the 2009. It's not as simple as "More bass=Less dynamic range". It's about how much bass and how much DR difference are we talking. In the case of the mono CDs, I am not seeing evidence that the EQ difference is enough to affect the peaks to the degree seen in the waveforms. I believe something else is at play, but I don't know what. The forms just look odd and it's odd there is so much headroom for most of the tracks. But the disc sounds fine and if there are those who prefer it, that's great.
I'm really hoping down the road they re-release a 2 CD set with stereo & mono, or better yet 1 CD with both, like they did with the US/Capitol CDs Maybe even a 5.1 Blu Ray on it's own. Personally, I don't want all the extras....
It depends on how it was transferred and then also how it was turned into true mono. If it was transferred on a stereo deck and then both channels were combined, you could get phasing issues. Which I think is the complaint about the '87 mono CDs, but they aren't something I know much about. I like to have true mono, so I convert something if it's into true mono. To avoid phasing, I just choose the better sounding channel. So it's a matter of the transfer/mastering details as to whether a problem has been caused. With the 2017 not being true mono, then we know it's probably ok as far as phasing issues. The 2009 is true mono, but as long as it was either transferred on a mono deck or only one channel was used from a stereo transfer, then it would be ok as well. I think I recall that they were transferred on a mono deck, but maybe I'm thinking of the 2014 vinyl. I'm sure others know for sure. I've found this inconsistency in a number of release, where some tracks are true mono and some aren't. The Pink Floyd 1965 tracks are all true mono except one track. The Velvet Underground & Nico Specter Sessions tracks have some true mono and some aren't.
While it may be true the 2017 is compressed, I had read that the DR number isn't accurate for vinyl. I don't know if that is accurate, but this video supposedly offers some evidence:
Your conclusion in not correct. Different or lack of eq can result in lower DR numbers, as has been demonstrated many times. And DR numbers of vinyl rips are generally less reliable. See here for details: More bass reduces (measured) dynamic range! Is the DR database really accurate for vinyl?
Something I noticed: The left channel seems to be quiter than the right. Maybe this is where the channel difference comes from.
No. The 2017 stereo mix is inspired by the original mono mix. Martin said he wanted to capture the energy of the mono mix, plus some of the mix choices the Beatles made on the mono that were not accurately replicated on the stereo mix. (Thankfully this did not include the chicken, which is all but unlistenable on the mono IMO.)
I really don't get all the hate for this tiny moment. I suppose it's cause I grew up on the mono. To me, it's normal and smooth. I've never even listened to the old stereo album in full, which I've only heard on the 87 CD, but I know that when I first heard the join between these tracks on the old stereo mix, it sounded wrong. The two sounds kind of merge into one on the mono, although they are completely separate, but it's actually the tape starting up on the guitar that people notice, not the chicken. I wouldn't describe either version as unlistenable, or even 'all but' unlistenable.
On the stereo the chicken cluck merges perfectly into the guitar note; on the mono there's a big gap in-between them. That's the rub (for me, anyway), and I find it so jarring and poorly constructed on the mono mix, not even so much for the gap but the odd way the guitar comes in with the tape speed artifact making it even more obviously disjointed compared to the stereo.
No. The chicken cluck ends and then the guitar starts. Both on the mono and stereo the 2 are completely seperate. On the mono we hear the tape starting up, that was removed for the stereo mix. That's why the Guitar comes in more abrupt. Still AFTER the chicken cluck though. I never got why all the CD's had the Chicken cluck at the start of reprise. you can nicely make a track split after it. I hope I don't have to post a proof audio clip.
The mono and stereo CDs have more bass response than the vinyl pressing of The 2017 mixes. I prefer vinyl and for mono I like the tube cut 1967 pressing of Pepper - the bass is so....... big and is awesome. I will say the new CDs sound great and they would be my go to for cd playing.
Of course they are separate sounds, chickens don't make guitar sounds and guitars don't make chicken sounds... but the cluck and the note butt up against each other on the stereo giving the impression that the cluck has transformed into the note. A wonderful illusion (intentional or not) that I loved for many years, one of the many "neat little bits" that make Sgt. Pepper such a great album to listen to... by comparison the mono version sounds disjointed and sloppy IMO. Granted, I heard the stereo first (and didn't hear the mono for at least another fifteen years or so after that); if I'd heard the mono version first I wouldn't have thought anything of it because that's just the way it would have been, I wouldn't have known any different until I heard the stereo version.
I don't why some use the word "hate" when someone prefers one thing to another. I can like one mix without HATING the other. Hopefully you can too.
Hi, first post here. I had to sign in to say that the new 2017 mono is extremely great sounding. A lot of depth and breath and details and punch. That's how all the 2009 mono boxset should have sounded. Yes, the 2009 mono boxset was a massive let down for me, as the sound is simply awful and claustrophobic, without a hint of depth. And for the people claiming that dynamic compression was used in the new transfer, 100% they didn't find this out by listening to the record. But hey, if graphs make you sleep better at night, go for them, but please at least be informed about how they work.
Ah, don't take my use of the word literally. I just mean that a lot of people seem to be against the mono version.
