The Beatles - Sgt. Pepper's 50th Anniversary (Content, Sound Quality & Discussion Thread Only!)

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by hodgo, Apr 5, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Gila

    Gila Forum Resident

    I have seen this term ("psychedelic") attributed to Sgt. Pepper album a lot, and I must say here I've seen that applied to stereo version only. How is exactly Sgt. Pepper psychedelic? And is it more psychedelic than Magical Mystery Tour (EP or Album version)?
     
  2. Tim Müller

    Tim Müller Forum Resident

    Location:
    Germany
    I get the feeling,

    here's many many fans who listended to the "original master tapes" .

    I wish I was able to do that!

    On the other hand, I wonder how can a mix with lots of dynamic compression (like the original mono mix, or the new re-mix) sound "closer to the master tapes" than ever (like these fans of the new re-mix claim), when the original stereo mix from 1967 did not have that amount of dynamic compression?
    Were the "original master tapes" (that all of these fans of the new re-mix heard...) already treated and processed with that large amount of dynamic compression..?
    And, was that heavy amount of dynamic compression, already on the master tapes, kind-of-magically removed when it came to the original stereo mix, which was done a few day later than the mono mix?

    Or is that saying, "closer to the original master tapes than ever", just a hollow meaningless marketing phrase...?

    Best regards.
     
    gja586 likes this.
  3. Sgt Pepper

    Sgt Pepper Forum Resident

    Location:
    United Kingdom
    Yes, I have, well most of them @studio two Abbey Road.
    That is merely your opinion and you are most welcome to it, but for me, it does not get better than this.
     
    fogalu likes this.
  4. Sgt Pepper

    Sgt Pepper Forum Resident

    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I said as good as, and listening to the new remix is as exciting as listening to them, which I was lucky enough to hear some samples of back in the day.
     
    Shaddam IV likes this.
  5. Psychedelic Good Trip

    Psychedelic Good Trip Beautiful Psychedelic Colors Everywhere

    Location:
    New York




    Another take on this new 2017 mix vinyl.
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2017
    Sgt Pepper likes this.
  6. Sgt Pepper

    Sgt Pepper Forum Resident

    Location:
    United Kingdom
    So it looks like we pay our money for what we like, so far I have heard that the 2012 mono, is best, 2009 is best, 1969 mono is better, original stereo is the one, original mono is the very best, limited edition releases on HQ discs are superior and many more.....for me and up to now this is as good as it gets.
     
    Psychedelic Good Trip likes this.
  7. Tim Müller

    Tim Müller Forum Resident

    Location:
    Germany
    Hello Sgt. Pepper,

    what master tapes did you hear...?

    What do you call a "master tape"..?

    To begin with, in the recording process, we have several recordings or "takes" of ensemble playing of the band of a song. Onto the "best recording", the "best take", some overdubbs (superimpositons) have been added. From this one "best take with overdubbs" all further mixes and records are being produced.

    (I leave out the description of bouncing and creation of "reduction mixes" or "reduction takes" here, because it does not make a substantial difference here.)

    So, one could call this one recording, this one take [or this one "reduction take"] (with the final overdubbs), the "master take". Or short, the "master". Or the "master tape". Or, the "4-track master".

    Of course, this is a 4-track, 4 channel tape and recording, so you cannot listen to this without any mixing (level adjusting of the 4 tape tracks or channels with respect to each other, at least) .
    Therefor, for the fabrication of an LP record, this "master take" has to be mixed into one channel (mono mix) or two channels (stereo mix).

    For the fabrication of the mono LP, one of these mono mixes was selected. One could call this selected mix the "mono master mix", or short, the "mono master", or even shorter, the "master". Or the "master tape".

    For the fabrication of the stereo LP, one of these stereo mixes was selected. One could call this mix the "stereo master mix", or short, the "stereo master", or even shorter, the "master". Or, the "master tape".

    For the production of the LP record, these stereo or mono master mixes had to be cut into laquer. Originally, that process was called "mastering", and likewise originally the laquer that resulted from this process, from which all records were produced, was called "the master".
    During this process, it was sometimes required to apply some EQ or dynamic compression. (To compensate for some loss of fidelity in the further process, or to make sure the fabricated record would sound "good" [without too many disturbing surface noise at soft low volume passages of the music] and would not skip on record players.)
    From that laquer master, all the stampers were made (by a multi-stage electroplating processe, to produce many stampers from one laquer master), from which all the records were pressed. During that process, the original laquer master was lost, only the stampers (and earlier "metall work" remained).

    When all of the original stampers (and intermediate "metall work") were worn and torn, a "re-cut", a "re-master" was required: Cut the master mix again into laquer. To produce further pressings of the LP.

    To make sure, further later pressings of the LP made from "re-cuts" sounded the same as the "first-cut" LPs, maybe sometimes, a tape was recorded simultaneously (or later, but) with that same EQ and dynamic compression settings [or whatever mor processing was applied] as for the original laquer master cut. One may call this tape the "production master", or short, "the master tape". And, in the case of mono and stereo editions of the same album, we have "mono production master" and "stereo production master".
    Later re-cuts then may cut "flat" from these "production masters".

    So, we see, "master tape", or "master recording", is somewhat ambivalent.

    So,
    what "master tape" did you listen to?

    Best regards
     
  8. Vincentrifugal

    Vincentrifugal Forum Resident

    I've noticed the "speech" pieces on some bonus tracks are cut and pasted out of context and sequence, particularly on take 9 of SPLHCB? Paul saying "I think it'll be another day singing it" after hearing the master take lead vocal as part of take 9 is curious to me. And John and Georges' comments jmust have come from the backing vocal track, again, what take? Also that "I feel it I feel it oh baby Free now I wanna be free now" scat (which was lifted by Paul and used on "Liverpool Sound Collage") again makes me wonder was this really part of take 9? I guess Giles was trying to make this take, the first track released for fans to get a glimpse of the 50th anniversary Pepper releases, as exciting and unique as he could to generate interest and sales. And hearing this chatter amongst Paul John and George at the end of this take was a clever idea to take us behind the curtain!
     
    Tim Müller likes this.
  9. Lance Hall

    Lance Hall Senior Member

    Location:
    Fort Worth, Texas
    On the multi-track the "free now" scat and the vocals discussion were probably playing at same time. One is at the end of the lead vocal track and the other is at the end on the backing vocals track.

    Giles had to move them apart so they didn't play at the same time.
     
    Vincentrifugal, Onder and slane like this.
  10. Tim Müller

    Tim Müller Forum Resident

    Location:
    Germany
    What tapes?

    Best regards
     
    lukpac and Onder like this.
  11. Onder

    Onder Senior Member

    This doesn't make sense. The remix was created merely few months ago. How could you listen to something that didn't even exist? When did the listen happen?
    What exactly did you hear? You said you heard "the master tapes". Were these the 4 track tapes or the stereo/mono mix tapes? You still haven't clarified.

    Ondra
     
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2017
    lukpac likes this.
  12. DRM

    DRM Forum Resident

    Although I'm not ruling out that Sgt. Pepper has heard the 2017 tapes.
     
  13. Dinstun

    Dinstun Forum Resident

    Location:
    Middle Tennessee
    Why would 2017 tapes even exist?
     
  14. DRM

    DRM Forum Resident

    Maybe a bit of analog work was done first.

    Maybe they recorded some onto tape.

    I would think there's tape recorded from the digital product/digital bits and pieces.
     
  15. DRM

    DRM Forum Resident

    I hope they come out with a cassette version of the 2017.

    But not brick-walled.

    Please let the music breathe.
     
  16. Vincentrifugal

    Vincentrifugal Forum Resident

    You know now that you mention it you can hear the Free now scat playing while John and George chatter at end of take 9!
     
  17. soundQman

    soundQman Senior Member

    Location:
    Arlington, VA, USA
    No, IMO. It was getting there though with some of the tracks, like Lucy, Mr. Kite, and Day in the Life. It was a variety album (in terms of style) with a good measure of psyche in it.
     
  18. Sgt Pepper

    Sgt Pepper Forum Resident

    Location:
    United Kingdom
    This. :agree:
     
    Shaddam IV, BlueSpeedway and DRM like this.
  19. Sgt Pepper

    Sgt Pepper Forum Resident

    Location:
    United Kingdom
    I think it was a mix of stereo/mono from the tapes held in the vaults at Abbey Road, Love Me Do, Strawberry Fields and much more.
    Abbey Road Studios Tour
     
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2017
  20. Tim Müller

    Tim Müller Forum Resident

    Location:
    Germany
    Aha, so then, when did you listen to master tapes, actually? And, what master tapes?

    (Just some any tapes played in Abbey Road doesn't make them "master tapes" in any way.)

    Best regards
     
    lukpac likes this.
  21. WhoDaresWins

    WhoDaresWins Forum Resident

    Location:
    Toronto
    It's highly unlikely I'm going to buy any more remixed Beatles projects unless there is something that is vastly improved from the original.

    At this point I'm only interested in new AAA vinyl stereo reissues.
     
  22. Tommyboy

    Tommyboy Senior Member

    Location:
    New York
    Of course
     
  23. bluemooze

    bluemooze Senior Member

    Location:
    Frenchtown NJ USA
    I get the sense that even though it's a remix, most people who are complaining are doing so because it's a remix and doesn't sound exactly the same the stereo version they've been listening to all their lives. I have it on vinyl and I think it sounds wonderful. :)
     
    Shaddam IV likes this.
  24. mrgroove01

    mrgroove01 Still looking through bent-backed tulips

    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    My memory from the presentation was that the audio sounded pretty direct from the multitracks but we're going back 34 years now so I wouldn't push this as fact. I've heard a boot made by someone who snuck in a recorder and that sounded like garbage and was a cruddy representation of the actual experience.

    My biggest takeaway was the simple clarity of John's voice in the early take of Strawberry Fields Forever. It gave me chills at the time because it sounded like he was singing it live in the room, which was eerie since he had died only 2 and a half years earlier.

    I was really lucky to be in London in the summer of '83.
     
  25. HotelYorba101

    HotelYorba101 Senior Member

    Location:
    California
    Well any counterargument loses its value when you try to imply objectivity to a subjective issue. "Rightfully agreeing", I mean look opinion are opinions. One man's crap remix is another man's holy grail, we should not even step into this territory it is just unproductive
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine