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

That must have been such an awesome experience! I remember hearing take 1 of Strawberry Fields in early 1986 on a vinyl bootleg titled Nothing Is Real. My jaw dropped! The whole arrangement with the background vocals was stunning.

 

Jeez will someone give me strength......how many times.

I think you're being rather pedantic. I later said this was thirty odd years ago. We are all still unclear if some were master tapes or not if they were not then they were taken directly from them or as close as..which I also said, You seem to want to keep pushing this point for some unfathomable reason?

At the end of the day, i heard recordings with SQ the like of which I had never heard before much like the new Sgt Pepper mix.

 

So you like those poor mixing choices. Well I guess if thats what ya like.

 

Firstly, if it was the Beatles Abbey Road Show I attended in the early eighties, then the sound quality and experience WAS awesome. A lot of, then, unheard outtakes were played over studio speakers in Abbey Road, Studio 2, where many of them were recorded. It was pretty close to a religious experience for those who were there and the hairs on the back of necks were raised and I'm sure a few tears shed.

I'm pretty sure that they would not have been from the actual master tapes, as they were sequenced and mixed, but they were pretty damn close. Obviously they would have had to mix these things from original tapes as this was before archive releases were around and that would have been done in-house at Abbey Road so they were as close as practical in reality. You would not run 'master tapes' repetitively in this fashion for the limited run of shows that they ran as they would have needed 'mixing' and sequencing. This would not be done 'live' for the numerous 'shows' that they ran at that time while the studio was out of action but quality-wise it was tremendous.

The whole event was a completely magical experience, particularly at that point in time, as it really predated a lot of the high quality bootlegs that appeared shortly afterwards. Those who attended will not forget that experience, it was like walking into a shrine. I have a few pretty poor quality photos of the day and the ticket in an photo album somewhere. I must dig them out. Sadly, it was before I owned a decent quality camera!

 

I gotta say, Mr Pepper, the anal retentive vitriol directed at you re: your mention of hearing the master tapes at the Abbey Road show is... ugly.

Rest assured the vitriol isn't really about what the definition of a master is, or whatever they're on about. It's about you liking the remix. That makes some people here... angry.

 

If you don't think the new remix sounds great, then you apparently don't know what a good or poor mixing choice is. So, there's that.

 

No, it's not. It's about claiming to have heard the master tapes when one, in fact, did not.

If you think it's "pedantic", that's fine. I prefer the term "accurate".

If you think claiming to have "heard the master tapes in Abbey Road" because you took the tour is correct, I can say with confidence that there is not a Beatles expert here that will agree that is the case.

 

I'm talking specifically about the vitriol, I was pretty clear about that, and I stand by my statement.

Yes some are just trying to clarify that issue, as you say. That's not what I'm referring to.

 

Jeez he is still banging on about this, friend give it a rest. I am " SAYING I THOUGHT I HEARD< THEN SAID IT WAS THIRTY YEARS AGO " how many times.

 

Thanks, these guys just don't give up, do they?

 

You are entitled to not like the remix even if Paul has sanctioned the release. But I don't understand the need to undermine his opinion. Paul is known for being a perfectionist, and he is very proud and protective of his Beatles legacy. If he didn't like the sound on the remix, he wouldn't have given his ok. If you don't agree with his decision, that's fine, but how can you suggest he is just concerned about the money and doesn't care about the way his most celebrated piece of work is presented?

It's incredible that some people seem to consider themselves more qualified than Paul to decide what's best for the Beatles' releases. I don't agree with the way some of the releases have been executed, but I would never insult Paul just to validate my opinion.

 

There are a few... individuals around here with a relentless single-issue agenda, yes.

 

Uh, yeah....because whatever compression they used on YS, if any, it is very well done and not cheap and crappy sounding like the compression Giles Martin uses.

Have you compared them?

 

Agreed. That whole premise is just promotional hype, to get people interested in the remix/mono mix who normally wouldn't be. And as you can see, it gets repeated like a mantra.

 

I haven't A-B'd them, but I didn't like the sound in YSS very much. IIRC, I thught it was overly bright. As for compression, I can assure you there was. I remember having to turn the volume down in some track.

 

I think, but.l do not know for sure, that McCartney did both the primary rhythm track and the really gnarly guitar parts on SPLHCB. from all the biographies I don't think John minded much but I think Georege was a little frosted by being second rate.

 

I think Paul McCartney knows what a good mix is and knows how to make one more so than some random dude who posts here, myself included. To suggest otherwise, is ridiculously offensive.

 

I have no idea what the hell some of you people are listening to! This is a great package that sounds really great! For crying out loud it's fifty years old and it still sounds like it could have been made yesterday. And by the way I did hear the master tapes at Abbey Road in 1986. In fact it was both a compilation of songs from "Rubber Soul" and 'SPLHCB". I still have a t-shirt I purchased from Abbey Road.

 

It's not entirely promotional hype, there's a lot of truth in it, which makes it good promotion. The fact that it was "repeated like a mantra" as you put it, speaks to it's achievement as a narrative. Sales is part of the job. What you put in a negative light, is in fact a well-executed aspect of the project, a contributor to it's success.

 

No, I'm telling a member they did not hear "the master tape". Our host would agree with me.

 

I had the pics but lost them moving house, I have searched for them ever since, had one sitting Ringo's drums but I have lost them. All I have left is a pic of me about to go in.

 

Guys post number six here:

The Beatles Abbey Road Show 1983 Video

This:

" It's about a 2 hour show with nice clips of Abbey Road studios at the beginning, Helen Shapiro, etc, then The Beatles, with at that time (1983) unreleased out-takes of I Saw Her Standing There, Help, Strawberry Fileds etc, matched to video, and Masters of released and unreleased songs like I'm a Loser, How Do You Do it, Leave My Kitten Alone"

 

. I've been consistent. The pepper sounds far more compressed than YSS. Comparing vinyl! It is a given CDs will be horribly compressed these days.

 

This new-remix has compression and ADT, and it has a more hard-rock atmosphere than the original stereo-mix... Gee, I wonder what else fits the description? Oh, yeah. The original mono-mix.

 

In the case of Sgt Pepper I do not think that there is any such thing as 'a master tape'. This would imply that it is the first generation of the sound that was recorded. As the tapes were bounced to add extra 'tracks', the originally laid down material is effectively a generation down anyway, in some cases possibly even two generations down. I would suggest that there is a 'mono master tape' which is the mixed version of the album compiled from the bounced tapes and also a 'stereo master tape' again compiled and mixed from the bounced tapes. I'm sure that these could be termed 'master tapes' but they are not first generation recordings. What Giles has done in this remixed release is locate the various 'first generation' recordings to assemble a 'new' set of tracks as close as possible to the original sounds captured on the pre-bounced tapes and used these to mix the album from the highest generation of each individual track that is available. This is probably the closest we will get to a genuine first generation 'master' to mix from.

Yes, we did not hear first generation 'master tapes' at the 'Abbey Road Show', but then neither did anyone who bought the original mono or stereo Sgt Pepper releases.

In the discussions above the definition of 'master tape' is subjective. There will be an 'Abbey Road Show' master tape in the same way that there are mono and stereo Sgt Pepper master tapes, but neither are actually 'true' first generation 'master tapes', as in case of the 'Abbey Road Show' they are sequenced, mixed recordings from a variety of tapes and in the case of the Sgt Pepper mono and stereo releases they are mixed versions of 'bounced' tapes.