Beatles Remasters on Vinyl (part4)

+1 I was just asking myself the same question...

 

Hmmm... Where do the 24/44 files come from?

 

Is this confirmed? If so it will be a must buy.

 

Yup. I have the USB Apple. I haven't really auditioned those files on top notch gear. I hope to be able to in the next year as I upgrade my digital conversion technology. But I was listening to some of the 2009 24 bit Rubber Soul tracks last night, and thinking how harmonically threadbare they sound. No doubt someone more skilled in working around the limitations of the equipment could put some more "meat" on those bones in the remastering. But it just sounds somewhat sterile, no matter what kind of EQ they added to it. I haven't compared the 24 bit files with the original CD releases, but that might be interesting. I just don't see how there is much that can be done to improve the original 16-bit files. You can't manufacture what wasn't originally there. (Although oddly enough I've found that, at least through my playback software, even an MP3 upconverted to 16bit WAV sounds more relaxed than the original MP3. Maybe it's just me or a quirk of my equipment. But I wonder if upconverting 16-bit to 24 bit might have a similar effect, at least with some software or gear.)

One question I have regards a statement made earlier in these vinyl Beatles threads (probably in part 3), to the effect that these new "definitive" masters were sourced from 16/44. But wouldn't George Martin, in 1980-whatever, have remixed these albums to the professional standard which would be 16/48? Wouldn't the Martin remix master be 16/48? A picky point, to be sure, but I'm curious about it. If so, then the vinyl would be mastered from whatever futzing they did with the archived 16./48 not 16/44. Probably no practical difference even if I am right. But inquiring minds want to know.

Just to be clear here, I am talking specifically about Help and Rubber Soul.

 

I don't have the blue box, so I am definitley interested in this. But preorder? NO WAY! I am still stinging from my preorder in 2009 of the stereo and mono sets. And the press release back then claimed a limited numbered edition mono box, which we all know turned out not to be numbered, and I suspect not so limited either. Now look how cheap those are. A "limited" edition of 50,000 boxes? That is a LOT for a vinyl release even for the Beatles. I'll buy one of these from cheap in 2013 or 2014 or used from one of you guys down the road.

I do have a question, however ... I read a few statements above in this thread stating unlimited mastering and sourced from 24-bit files. I assume it would only make sense that these would be cut from the hi-rez files since those were available previously on the USB version. Are the statements about unlimited mastering just wishful thinking, or is there any real expectation that this is what is being released?

 

Those first six words of your post reveal the flaw of your argument.

 

This was posted by "Spyder" on September 3rd, well before we had any news as to when/if these were going to come out:

"Possible new Beatles vinyl before the end of this year (tentative Nov. 6)
Pressing at Rainbo"


He was only off by a week on the release date, so it's a good bet that he was right as to where thay would be pressed. He looks to run United Record Pressings, so he probably does know. Maybe he'll chime in again and confirm that.

 

And the money train keeps ROLLING along. Step right up folks. The only way these new sets could be worth getting is if they use higher resolution for the tracks. However....if you have the money to burn......

 

It's in the press release.

In cutting the digital masters to vinyl, stringent safeguards and procedures were employed. After cutting to lacquer, determined to be warmer and consistent than cutting to DMM, the next step was to use the Neumann VMS80 cutting lathe at Abbey Road. Following thorough mechanical and electrical tests to ensure it was operating in peak condition, engineer Sean Magee cut the LPs in chronological release order. He used the original 24-bit remasters rather than the 16-bit versions that were required for CD production. It was also decided to use the remasters that had not undergone ‘limiting,' a procedure to increase the sound level.

 

It's in the press release.

 

Thanks, then I guess these should sound different than the CDs. Funny that the press release would state this and so many opinions seem to imply that they expect this to sound no better than the 2009 CDs.

 

Steve Hoffman said he had heard some of them, and that they should sound similar to the previous CD releases. I'm sure it won't be exactly the same, but they'll have a similar character. Now, either you trust Hoffman's ears or you don't, but I think he's probably right. They should sound a little better because of added resolution, and hopefully less compression. I like the sound of the remasters on the USB Apple which is higher resolution. The vinyl might sound a bit better, but I doubt a vast improvement. Or even a justifiable one. JMO.

 

I bet they will sound great. Let the audiophiles argue over what is the best, I will just sit back and enjoy the music.

 

Pretty sure I'd previously read these were pressed at Pallas......then again I could be wrong - have been reading so much about this release that I now can't remember what is fact and what is speculation.

 

I really hope you are right. I would hate for them to be done at GZ.

 

Exactly! I wasn't around to get the original pressings of these albums back in the 60's. In fact, my first experiences with the Beatles albums were through the 1987 CD's. And while I would love to have the best pressings of all the albums in near mint condition, I don't have the money or time to hunt them all down. So, if I can get these albums at a decent price and they sound good, which sounds like they will be, then I'll be happy. At any rate, these should be a huge step above the vinyl sourced from the '87 CD files that were the easiest to get hold of until now.

 

Those extra 8 bits really made a difference - reduced a lot of the harshness and lack of warmth of the CDs (except for HELP! & Rubber Soul, of course). I would imagine that using masters that also have a much higher sampling rate (for the vinyl) will only improve things that much more.

 

Well this is pretty frustrating. 24-bit remasters could mean 192/24, but then again, they could mean the 44.1/24. Has the sampling rate of the digital source files been posted anywhere?

Also, any word on whether the original stereo mixes of Help! and Rubber Soul will be released on vinyl at the same time as the mono mixes?

 

24-bit, 96kHz files according to an email reply from EMI to one of our fellow members (dasacco): http://www.stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=8111298&postcount=687

Yes, both boxes will be as the CD boxes were. Mono box coming in 2013, with original stereo mixes of H! & RS.

(I thought it was hilarious when someone earlier used H! for HELP! so I had to do it too ).

 

This whole thing is so very interesting.

 

Absolutely.

I've been kindly lent the blue box to tide me over but I will definitely buy the mono box, providing it is released in 2013 as per the rumours. There's no way I could afford to obtain mint original pressings in mono, or the black box for £1000+ so this is the only way I'll be able to obtain Beatles mono vinyl and I bet it'll sound great.

 

I've already got a second-hand BC13 box, but the vinyl is extremely thin and quite noisy. I'll probably spring for Pepper and MMT for the packaging and AR and LIB. If they're any good, I'll then get the rest separately except for YS (I've got the YS Songtrack vinyl), PM1&2 (I've an unplayed copy from the last digital releases back in '88 and the White Album (the best of my BC13 LPs SQ-wise). Do any of the online sellers have the individual albums listed yet?

PS The book looks quite nice, hopefully it will be sold separately at some point.

 

I hope they will include the unreleased YELLOW SUBMARINE EP on the box with full layout etc...so the MONO MASTERS stuff would fit perfectly to two LPs !!!
As I own all albums as stereo versions only, I think I will buy the mono box instead seraching for MINT copies of the very expensive original pressings...

 

Obviously. We talking about milking a very big cow, and they know how to do it right.

 

One thing that would concern me is the fact that there will be between seven and nine songs on each side of the Past Masters LPs. So a question for the experts on the forum - is this going to affect the sound quality at all?