Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by AlanDistro, Aug 12, 2012.
The mono Revolver sounds a bit muddy to me.
I don't think you are ever going to see The Beatles remixed, except maybe for the few one off projects like yellow submarine songtrack and Love. Why? The remaining Beatles, their estates, and Apple in general are super anal about protecting the Beatles image and what they want represented.
Remaster is fine, but when you start to talk about changing history by changing levels, mixes, etc things get a little weird. Paul would drop dead of a heart attack if his bass was taken down in the mix hah... I don't see Paul, Ringo, Yoko, Olivia or Apple signing off on that ever. Besides, once they did a remix we would all sit here complaining about something else and still all be hunting for the originals : )
Correct me if I am wrong experts, but if the '87 mix was mixed/mastered in digital with 1987 technology and sampling, and that is the master they worked on for the 2009 release, doesn't that mean the 2009 release is basically a 1987 digital recording with some makeup on it? In other words, because they used the '87 remix that was already digital, they did NOT go back to the original tapes and digitize with modern technology like the other albums correct?
I bet they did for the mono box 1965 stereo mixes though which might explain why they sound awesome and why my 2009 rubber soul stereo LP sounds like a CD
I was one of the people who sent back their "bad" Rubber Soul for the corrected version. Guess I'm paying for college. Actually I figured that most people wouldn't send it in & the corrected would be rarer than the original.
Interesting. I have a NM copy of the first pressing with the remix 11 of TNK and I thinks it really has a dynamic, for lack of a better word, sound to it.
I sent mine back as well. I don't know what the Capitol Box Sets are worth these days. I never figured I would sell mine. Did they go OOP?
I agree. It's the only real disappointment in the Mono set for me, apart from the 'Michelle' distortion on RS. I really cannot understand how that was left as is. I don't really like the 2009 stereo Revolver but slightly prefer it over the Mono.
Going back to an earlier comment in this interesting thread, I love the stereo BFS that really was the surprise package from both sets to me. I would love stereo remixes to this standard for RS and Revolver.
Nobody wants the box with the wrong mixes.
Yes. This is true of the 2009 CDs, the USB FLAC files and the 2012 LPs.
Go figure! The best sounding of the early ones has the weakest material.
Nothing weak about Beatles For Sale.
Nothing remotely weak about Beatles for Sale. If there's another album released within six months of it that has material anywhere near as good, share it with us.
Three of my favorite mono releases: "Help!", "Rubber Soul" and "Revolver" all sound muddy to me on the 2009 set.
What is your stereo system? You have nothing filled out. The albums aren't muddy at all. You're just used to so much jacked up treble crap that you miss that extra distortion. Geez, this is the only time you'll ever be able to hear these albums sounding halfway decent, don't give the guys at Abbey Road any excuse to bump up the treble on the next project.
They don't sound muddy on my system.
It's still considered by many to be a low point out of all their albums. (A low point for The Beatles is a high point for many other artists.). Obviously, 1964 was a hectic year (work load-wise) and that definitely shows versus A Hard day's Night.
This one sounds extremely "muddy" on my system:
Sounds better through a Mojo Filter...
Always back to the Beatles. Arnie
Maybe to your ears, not mine. I don't own a $10,000 system but mine isn't exactly garbage. IMO, treble boost or not, those three 2009 mono CD's sound muddy and I prefer the older vinyl.
Get a cheap old BSR five band graphic EQ for $40.00 on eBay. Add a bunch of graphic at 5,000 cycles to your mono CDs. Now you'll match the old LP. Difference is you can remove it after it starts driving you bat****.
The mono CD's sound nothing like I would have done in mastering but at least they haven't been ****ed with EQ wise and limiting wise like the stereo CD's. Thank heaven for that.
Steve, what would you have done differently? Thanks.
Thanks! That is the main question I had and the reason I reopened the thread. Ahhhhh...the undeniable truth that you have to go find yet another copy of Rubber Soul and Help lol ...good stuff
I completely disagree. I love BFS. No Reply, I'm a Loser, Baby's in Black, Words of Love ...I could keep going, but geez what's not to like?
I don't expect any magic (especially none done using digital tools). What I would like is a more balanced stereo mix that completely ditches the hard panning approach of the original and presents the material within a more thought over stereo spectrum.
Are the Rubber Soul tracks limited to just 4 basic tracks? Or did some amount of pre-bouncing take place to get to the final 4 tracks that were then mixed to stereo? If there are more pre-bounced basic tracks, then a remix could be done from scratch without being limited to the final 4 tracks.
Separate names with a comma.