Rolling Stones in Mono - 2016 - Content Discussion Only (Mixes, Tracks, etc.)*

Are you 100% the one you got is official? Because there are tons of Chinese fakes on the market. Inspect the hub of the CD carefully. If it carries SID Mould Code ifpiB404 or similar (B414, B414) - you got Chinese fake.
Check another thread for details
Rolling Stones in Mono - 2016 - Pricing & Shipping Thread
Rolling Stones in Mono - 2016 - Pricing & Shipping Thread

 

The stray cats with Beggars banquet lp as 1 of the two lps is in regards to vinyl set not the cd box
Sorry for confusion

 

I have most of these titles in their stereo DSD vinyl form. IMO- they sound fantastic.

I would love to compare , but the cost is high .
for those that have both- are the new Monos the way to go? Is there enough of a sound me difference warrant selling the DSD's for this set?

.

 

This has been a random packaging problem with the Vinyl box set with the stray cats lp. I'd follow-up asap with seller to get a replacement copy.

 

I am curious to know if the Chinese counterfeits return the same EAC results as the authorized sets.

 

Not really, IMO. There's a lot of duplication, and I found the first ABKCO box to be quite good in terms of sound quality and pressing quality. I only bought the mono box because I found a great deal with an Amazon seller, and had some gift cards to use toward the purchase. ABKCO was talking about releasing individual albums from the set later (with the possible exception of "Stray Cuts"), so that might be worth the wait. I like the mono versions of "Beggars Banquet" and "Let It Bleed", but it's a pretty subtle difference, all things told. They also sound good in the stereo versions.

 

2. They do, save for the 2002 Abcko 'Aftermath', which features an extremely narrowed version of the original stereo mix (some stereo mixes were narrowed on the 'Flowers' stereo remaster too, IIRC). Also, the Abcko 'Got Live If You Want It' [US] remaster uses a completely different stereo re-mix from any preceeding release. Beggars' Banquet itself is pitch-corrected on both the Abcko stereo remaster and the new 2016 mono remaster.

 

The 2002 Aftermath has some narrowing, but it isn't "extremely narrowed"; that would be the original 1986 ABKCO issue. Between The Buttons has similar narrowing.

The Got Live remix is similar, albeit not identical, to the 1987 ABKCO.

And note that Beggars isn't pitch corrected, it's simply from the masters which run at the correct speed.

 

Technically, we should not discuss here counterfeits.
But yes, to some extend. Chinese CD's share the same TOCs and peak levels but have different CRC. I.e. Chinese CD's utilize the same mastering but are recorded with different write offset.
As an example

Chinese

Track02.wav

Peak level 99.1 %
Copy CRC 8375D721
Cannot be verified as accurate (confidence 7) [39D5BFDC], AccurateRip returned [0BC499FC]
Copy OK

Official
02 I Just Want To Make Love To You.wav

Pre-gap length 0:00:00.02

Peak level 99.1 %
Extraction speed 1.4 X
Track quality 99.9 %
Copy CRC 9FD732CE
Accurately ripped (confidence 7) [0BC499FC] (AR v2)
Copy OK

 

My advice would be to wait until the individual titles will be released later this year and then buy the 3 titles which are essentially the only full albums that has unique mono versions compared to stereo:

Aftermath
Between The Buttons
Their Satanic Majesties Request

Note: There is a UK and a US version of Aftermath, both of which adds and lacks some tracks compared to the two versions: The UK has the tracks "What To Do", "Out Of Time", "Mother's Little Helper" and "Take It Or Leave It", which are missing from the US version. The US version, however, has "Paint It, Black", which the UK version lacks.
If you decide buying the US version, you can supply with the mono Flowers compilation and you will get "Out Of Time" (in a slightly edited version), "Mother's Little Helper" and "Take It Or Leave It", but no "What To Do". If you decide buying the UK version, you will get no "Paint It, Black". Flowers also boasts 2 unique Aftermath-outtakes, "Sittin On A Fence" and "Ride On, Baby", so that album is quite essential no matter what.

Other than that, there isn't really very much 'unique' mono material. The mono Beggars Banquet has a unique mix of "Sympathy For The Devil", while the rest of the songs are folddowns from the stereo, so it's pretty subjective if that mono Beggars Banquet are worth it because of one mix variation.

Another thing is that the UK configuration of the debut album (which is the version that will be reissued this year), is one song different from the US counterpart (the DSD vinyl version from 2003): The UK has "Mona", the US has "Not Fade Away". All other tracks are identical.

The british album "No. 2", will also be the first time since the eighties that the album gets a stand-alone re-release (not counting it's apperances in boxed sets).

 

That's my plan. I don't know if I'd spin Satanic enough to justify owning a mono and stereo version, but I'm really excited to get Aftermath and Buttons in glorious mono.

 

As someone who has not bought the box and is waiting for the individual sets, I would love it if they released 2 disc sets with mono and stereo versions from Aftermath onwards.

Considering Beggars Banquet and Let it Bleed are fold downs to mono, I wonder if they can really be marketed as authoritative versions that demand you to buy separately. However they might make sense if sold as a curio alongside the stereo version. Would they really want two versions of the one album sitting in the racks in record shops?

 

I wouldn't expect sonic miracles from the mono versions of Aftermath & BTB.

 

XLD will show if a CD would match with a different offset. Does EAC not do that or do the counterfeits not match even with an offset shift?

 

I just like the mixes a lot more. I wouldn't expect sonic miracles from much of anything the Stones recorded prior to Banquet.

 

To each his own. I think the BTB mono mixes are just okay and the Aftermath mono mixes are less than just okay. And Aftermath in particular makes a fairly decent recording (as evidenced by the stereo mix) sound pretty bad.

Also, Satanic is prior to Banquet and is one the better recordings sonically in the Stones canon.

 

I just don't really like mid-60's hard-panned stereo mixes. Aftermath isn't the worst offender, but I would enjoy having both. It's the best of their early records, for sure.

Satanic is a better recording, just not a very good album, aside from the two singles on Side B. ("2000 Light Years From Home" is one of my favorite Stones tunes). I really like "2000 man", but think Kiss did it better on their Unplugged album.

 

I am not familiar with XLD and never use that program. I am not Apple guy.
I do not own Chinese version of the box. Somebody sent me a log file from a rip of Chinese box made by EAC configured to accurate rip mode. I compared that with the log for the official disc that I own. Peaks and TOC were identical. CRC was different and did not match. That is it. If this will help


Route 66 Chinese box

Route 66 official EU box

 

As I said, to each his own on preferring mono vs stereo mixes or whether Satanic is a good or not good album. But you were simply wrong stating that one shouldn't expect sonic miracles from anything recorded before Beggars. Sure there is quite a bit of early badly recorded stuff, but Satanic, Aftermath, the Chess stuff - are all before Beggars and were well-recorded. There's little reason mono mixes of those pre-Beggars albums can't all be good sonically (not withstanding that true mono mixes of some of Chess stuff doesn't exist).

IMO, one reason Aftermath in mono "sounds" like crap compared to the stereo mix is because IMO it's not a very good mix to begin with.

 

Is there something like a general consensus as how do the new mono stones from the box compare to seventies boxed decca uk pressing ?

 

I only have the CD set and 2 boxed pressings to compare to (the first 2 Stones UK albums) but I prefer listening to the CDs. Tighter, sharper and more bass presence on the debut and more detailed sound on No. 2.

 

Thanks for your opinion...I am more focusing on a comparaison between UK boxed mono decca from the seventies and the lp from the new box...I am very "ear-sensitive" to analogue mastered lp but asI hear that digital sourced lps can sound very good, I was asking this question. In other words, when you listen to the new mono lp from the box, is it not too clinical ? There is the instruments, the presence, the sharper things but on an analogue lp the music is generally floating in the air and in the atmosphere of the room and it's not fatiguing at all; for a digital one, the music tend to float in the void... So I would like to hear from people who have both boxed decca pressings and the new ones : what are their feelings ? If they had to choose between a late seventies repress in VG++, EX, NM or the new ones, what would they buy ? In fact, as the lps from the box will be sold individually very soon, I am hesitating to concentrate on buying boxed decca pressing from the seventies or even from beginning eighties made in house from decca tapes or buy the new ones...

 

The vast majority of my listening is on headphones, so that probably affects my preference here as well. My Aftermath from the ABKCO box is fantastic, just a weird headphone listen.

 

My avatar used to be the London CD of Aftermath (stereo). "A sonic gem" is how I went on the record describing it. After all these years I am loving the mono. It rocks. In your face. Sometimes a change is as good as a Holiday.

 

I have a few of mid seventies boxed Deccas and find them a really strident harsh listen. I have the new vinyl mono box and am slowly making my way through. It's a much easier more pleasurable listen for me. I also prefer the mastering on the US 60s Londons to the Deccas. Many here would disagree with that. YMMV.