Sounds like a comment made by someone who wouldn't have put hard earned money toward Beatles Capitol Albums Volumes I and II. Which was these albums remastered in 2004. If Capitol sound is crappy, then the 2009 sugary sweet overly processed remasters must be declared as crappy as well. Unless you like John sounding like a Chipmunk on "I'm Only Sleeping". I'm Only Sleeping "Lite"...that is.
The sound of John's vocal on I'm Only Sleeping has nothing to do with the remastering process. The reason it sounds like chipmunks is that it was recorded that way, recorded with the tape machine running slow to sound sped up on playback. That's how it sounds on all 4 available mixes (UK mono/stereo, US mono/stereo) on every release in any format since 1966. Ondra
Now that takes me back! That one too...I remember buying the Something New cassette on holiday with my folks in Kelowna. BC, unlike Alberta had PST in addition to GST- I was a bit taken aback at spending almost sixteen bucks on an album that wasn't even half an hour long
I foolishly sold my Capitol Years Vol. 1 & 2 (at least someone on the board got them) a few years ago and now I miss them. Luckily, I just found a Vol. 2 SK1 and am rebuying Vol. 1. Although I have the Mono box, the running order just doesn't sound right to my old ears. I thought I could live with the US Albums set, and I'm glad to have the better replica covers, I miss the sound of the original Capitols. Now, if I could just find a mini lp replica of the US Let it Be gatefold...
I realize John's voice leans toward this...via the original. And that he was playing around with his voice being altered during this period in time. But to ME...it's even more accentuated/pronounced in this direction...via the processing involved with the 2009 remaster. Compared to the original. And the heavier guitar of the original She Said She Said is somewhat diminished/smoother/"lite" via the 2009.
How on earth would they do that? What kind of processing could achieve that? All 4 mixes run at the same speed, end of story.
There is no tool that can do that. The only way how to accentuate the chipmunk effect of John's voice is to speed up the entire recording. But that is not the case, it is at the correct speed. She Said She Said, I agree about that one. Treble or upper mids were reduced which affected guitars and cymbals the most. But it's not excessive digital processing, it's just (IMHO) unfortunate EQ decision during the mastering process. Ondra
It may not be that I'm hearing John's voice sped up. It may just sound "lighter"...smoother. Because of mastering decisions made. Leading to an "animated" sound. And digital processing...or "unfortunate EQ decisions during the mastering process"...to me are not that different. Because I'm thinking the remastering was done digitally. Edit: I did just re-read your point. And understand...now...that you were making a point about excessive digital processing. I have to think about whether it is excessive processing or just "unfortunate EQ decisions".
I beg to differ. Easily available software now enables you to raise or lower the pitch of a recording without changing the speed (and, conversely, change the speed without changing the pitch). The combined versions of Strawberry Fields Forever on the LOVE album - originally in different keys - are a good example of the use of such software.
Yes, but not when the vocals are part of the final mix. You would need to remix the song and apply that effect to the vocals. Anyway, no speed change was made to IOS.
Oh. I didn't realize it was a consumer's responsibility to look up everything on the internet before buying it, just in case a record company is deceiving them. Hmm. Okay.
Yes, I'm aware of that. I meant impossible to alter just the vocal within the entire mix. But already pointed out by @slane . Ondra
Not all mixes and sources are equal or equalized. But it is up to the listener to decide which one they think sounds better or best to them or true to their memory. The Capitol albums originally sounded a certain way because of situational reasons. To alter them in a reissue in order to give American listeners the "real" experience is nothing short of a travesty, and reverse-engineered repackaging.
How is the record company deceiving anyone? Is the 50th anniversary Sgt. Pepper advertised as "same old mix"? Is the US box advertised as "with duophonics and all"? The record company has publicized the characteristics of the products, the information is out there (not only internet) for those interested. So yes, if you are interested in a product, it's your responsibility to inform yourself about it. Then if the information released is false, you can blame the record company.
Capitol also changed the way their albums sounded through the years. And every reissue changes the way the original release sounded. Do the 87 CDs sound like the original UK records? No. Do the 09 remasters sound like the original records or the 87 CDs? No. We can call all reissues travesties, or we can accept each reissue is a reinterpretation.
It's a re-vision of a repackaging. I can see the 'get it right' 50 years on aspect... but US buyers would ostensibly want the original 1960s mixes and engineering. So the whole 2014 Box is a misleading endeavor to the unsuspecting audience.
How did the 2014 versions sell compared to the 2004/2006? I suppose I could check reviews around the internet, particularly Amazon, to see how they were received outside of our bubble.
Everybody arguing against "modern" sound quality...then(?): they hold up a CASSETTE to prove what they *want* it to sound like???
If they wanted to get it right...they just had to get THESE down from the 'Tower (like Ted Jensen did; fifth-generation copies on 1/4" Scotch Tartan Series not withstanding)
-Are the "US buyers" a unified entity? I should think there are many different buyers so that different products can be created for all of them. -Didn't the US buyers who wanted the 60s Capitol masters (the mixes are all the same except for four or five) get exactly that with the Capitol boxes?
