The Beatles "Help!" and "Rubber Soul" original 1965 stereo mixes?

Help me out here...
Do you mean the songs you mention had to be bounced down to a second tape machine? "Help" yes. No argument there. No mention of "Run For Your Life" in the Rubber Soul booklet. Their Research is from that "recording with the Beatles" book (If that's the title) that all of us refer to. Yes, "Run For Your Life" has: Drums, bass, lead guitar, rhythm guitar, John's volcal overdubbed and another lead guitar which plays the nice Harrison solo.
Must've beem bounced down right? At first listen, yes, but take a closer look. Assuming The Beatles were thinking ahead, knowing what arrangements they planned:
Track 1: Bass, drums, acoustic rhythm guitar, lead guitar.
Track 2: lead guitar
Track 3: John's volcal
Track 4: John's overdub

You're Gonna Lose That Girl. (Does the booklet say it was bounced?)
If it isn't bounced down...
Track 1: Drums, bass, guitar. (Sounds like one playing)
Track 2: Lead guitar / Solo
Track 3: All volcals
Track 4: bongos and piano.
I don't have the book so it's my guess but remember this was a common recording technique of track layout for George Martin: Rhythm instruments on one track, lead guitar one the other and volcals for the third with Mr. Martin leaving the fourth track free for a volcal overdub, guitar Solo or other instruments.

 

I was also confused Steve so maybe that's why my answer has you baffled.
The booklet for the remastered Rubber Soul says only one song "Michelle" has been bounced down to a second tape. The member mentioned 3 songs that had 5 discrete tracks. "Run For Your Life" was one of the three songs. Since it wasn't bounced down how could it have 5 discrete tracks. And if it was internally bounced, as some members claim, you would lose the original track. Yes...Right? So there is no way "Run For Your Life" could have 5 discrete tracks. Sorry if I wasn't clear sir. "Run For Your Life" does sound like there are more instruments than usual leading a lot of people to believe that this song was bounced down to a second tape. Since the "Rubber Soul" booklet says only "Michelle" was bounced down, indicating that "Run For Your Life" could only have 4 tracks I was giving my best guess (never said it was a fact) as to how they got it on 4 tracks without bouncing of any kind. I never claimed they were the actual tracks layout. And I made very clear my uncertainty about the last song I mentioned. And of course we all know "Help" was bounced down.

Big mistake though. Should not have mentioned a track layout unless I read it. Even if I said clearly it being a guess it does confuse people. And some people might take it as fact. And there is enough false Beatle info out there without me adding to it. I am glad you pointed this out. I should've known better. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

 

Thank you sir. Very clear. I forgot they sometimes put guitar and volcals together in those days. I was right - only Michelle and Help but my guessed track layout were...silly. Wiser heads prevail.

 

The problem with your track layout for Run For Your Life is that the bass is not on track 1. It was overdubbed on its own track as revealed by Rockband extraction. They didn't need to filter the bass it is clearly a discrete track and they used 5 discrete tracks for the Rockband remix.

As for You're Gonna Lose That Girl.
Listening to the released stereo mix one would assume that the track layout looks like this:
Track 1: drums, bass, el. rhythm guitar (left channel)
Track 2: Lead and bg vocals (center)
Track 3: lead and bg vocals double tracking (center)
Track 4: piano, bongos, el. guitar solo (right channel)

The problem here is that Help! DVD 5.1 remix has one set of the backing vocals on its own track which again gives 5 tracks in total.

Ondra

 

Run For Your Life:
Yes, that is a possibility. Lead guitar/slide guitar on the same track with the vocals double tracking.
Track 1: drums, acoustic guitar, el. guitar (plays the riff and on off beats during the verse/chorus), tambourine
Track 2: bass
Track 3: lead and backing vocals
Track 4: lead/backing vocals doubling (only chorus), lead guitar/slide guitar

With this layout, the vocals and guitars on track 4 doesn't even overlap each other. But this means that during the stereo mixing they were constantly panning the track left for double tracked vocals and right for the guitars (1965 stereo mix). Which seemed to me as something unlikely as all other stereo mixes to this date were just set the panorama and go. But yes, it is possible with this scenario.

However, You're Going To Lose That Girl does indeed have one set of the backing vocals isolated. And no matter how you try to re-arrange the layout it always gives 5 tracks to get all the elements. Any thoughts?

Ondra

 

You would have to tell me how John double tracked his vocal on the one track.

 

The guitar in Nowhere Man moves from left, to right for the solo, back to left.

But, er...the guitar *does* move:

0:03 - lead & slide guitar left
0:19 - doubled vocals left
0:29 - lead & slide guitar right

Interesting that the bass track has a partially erased (?) guide vocal.

 

That's right, forgot about that!

The guitar does indeed move. It's on the left just for the beginning of the song. I wonder if's just an error as both the vocals and guitars pan into the opposite channel of it's double tracked equivalent. The intro is the only exception with both lead guitars in the left. It's interesting that the 1987 remix copies this.

Is indeed is. It sounds as a crosstalk rather than leakage from a monitor speaker onto the vocal mic.

Ondra

 

I had an almost identical model to that (even the colour)! I heard everything up to Sgt Pepper on it. It must have sounded horrendous but I didn't know the difference.

I do remember buying an expensive diamond stylus for this machine back in 1967 (about four times the cost of a sapphire one) and hearing "Strawberry Fields" a tiny bit clearer!

I went stereo the following year.

 

It meant a lot to P J Proby!

 

I complained. The obvious solution would have been to include both the original stereo mixes and the 1987 remixes on the 2009 stereo reissue of Help! and Rubber Soul. The albums are short enough that both would have fit. I'm also a little miffed that the original stereo mixes were not reissued on LP.

 

In regards to Help i am not miffed. The original stereo is a pile of mud. Imo.

 

Like I've said, I think the reasoning was:

1) For whatever reason (which is another discussion), the 1987 remixes were considered canon, which placed them on the main stereo releases.
2) Placing both stereo mixes on the stereo releases would have resulted in higher royalty costs compared to the other stereo releases (at least in the US), and would have made those two discs anomalies compared to the rest of the catalog.
3) Since the discs were only available together in a box, and not individually, it was felt the original stereo mixes could be placed in the mono box. Less confusion for casual fans, and any additional royalty costs would be spread out in the cost of the whole box.

I much prefer it to the remix.

 

I know you do. And you prefer your hole in the mid mixes wide

 

Isn't there a book out there that goes into detail of the track layouts of every song?

 

Good point.

 

Although I prefer the 1987 Help remix I wouldn't call the original stereo mix "mud." Muddled maybe but not mud. The honour of Mud goes to the mono mix. But then we are used to this hyped top end of modern mastering so that when we here what the master really sounds like, it sounds funny to us. That's what I love about Steve's mastering. He doesn't hype up the top end or yank down the cloud (100-250hz).
We were lucky this time. The Beatle Mono Box was left as is without going crazy with the eq. Every time I buy a remaster I feel like I am playing Russian roulette. And reviews don't necessarily help. You would be surprised how many people think a bright, overcompressed master with the mid bass severely yanked down sounds just "fab!"

 

You know I used to get a big kick out of trying to figure out the track layouts of Beatle songs. It was fun. It kept my mind busy on those long walks home from work. Just me, My Sony Media Player and over 100 Beatle Wave tracks. I can see that a lot of members here have given this some deep thought. You have put down suggested track layouts that I would never have thought of and I have learned a lot.

 

We can meet on mudled

 

Agreed.

 

Could you please tell me where to get this plugin? I tried searching for it but I can't find it anywhere.

 

It may not be the simplest method, but I have done this to narrow a wide stereo track:

• Load the same stereo track twice into Audacity.
• Using the pull-down menu to the left of the bottom track, select "Swap Stereo Channels".
• Using the Gain control (shown as -...+) to the left of the bottom track, hit play and decrease the gain to desired position. If the Gain is at zero, the effect is mono. Decreasing it widens the stereo image.

Any comments on this? Is this a valid method?

 

You can just split the track to mono and pan the two tracks to the width desired.