The peculiar nature of the Sgt. Pepper 50th anniversary mix and its consequences for The White Album

If he is exaggerating, so is Giles when he talks about following the mono mix and adding punch and blah blah. I don’t think either of them are though. This new mix is much less varied aesthetically because of the foot being on the accelerator for the whole ride.

 

Are you talking about dynamics or instrumentation?

 

I'm talking about the mixing aesthetic and dynamics - I find the new stereo mix to be a far blander experience, partly because of the constant sound and partly because of not taking advantage of the stereo spectrum and centering things that could have been panned. This is also an issue in the 5.1. Giles had two speakers at the back but seemed to use them as little as possible.

 

That's alright since the songs themselves are varied. Now it's a bit more cohesive, uniform and logical.

 

...but why mix it in a way that nullifies the variations? That is the sign of, at the very least, a lack of sensitivity to the material.

 

Why headphones? Won't listening on speakers do? I have never owned headphones, but I have owned dozens of speakers.

 

I disagree, nothing is nullified. The composition is the same; the performance is the same; the instrumentation is the same.

The only thing that's changed is the sound elements is less generated, possibly different EQ and compression parameters, and just different orientation of instruments in the stereophonic sound stage.

If you really think those aforementioned properties so drastically "nullify the variation" then I don't know what to tell you.

 

I watched a YouTube review where the gentleman says that the mastering is better on the LP compared to the cd. He said he found that the LP did not distort and that the dynamic range was better than the cd. Is this your experience?

 

You could start by confirming for me that you are saying that differences in equalisation, compression and panning and volume aren’t significant in the presentation of recorded music and that different mixes of the same thing make for substantially the same thing. Really?

 

Now you are backpedaling.

Might as well presume you mean the ONLY thing that distinguishes music from each other is EQ, compression and volume.

 

The vinyl got a different mastering than the digital versions. No limiting was used and the EQ is more natural. There is still a bit of compression since that was applied to the mixes, but it is far and away the superior sonic experience IMO.

 

No, I’m trying to understand what you are saying. It looks like you are saying that the same thing mixed in different ways isn’t any different and that all that matters is the song and the performance. I think that’s total nonsense.

 

No, I’m trying to understand what you are saying. It looks like you are saying that the same song and the same performance is different and that all that matters is if it's mixed in different ways. I think that’s total nonsense.

 

No one asked me, but nowhere does he say this, that I can see. When you put absolute language like "isn't *any* different" or "*all* that matters" into the mouth of someone making a far more nuanced point, it can be a tad bit aggravating for the reader.

Any human being can understand that they're listening to the Beatles Sergeant Pepper - whether it's the mono, stereo, or stereo remix. In that way, it's substantially the same thing.

 

Well said.

 

I'm not particularly interested in a uniform and "logical" Sgt. Peppers.

 

Exactly.

 

You talk an awful lot about things you aren't interested in

 

Your point of view gets likes...but I couldn't disagree more.

 

Exactly. Critical point of distinction.

 

Ok, so you’re going to rewrite my posts now but change a few words? Is mockery necessary?

I’m saying that mixing variations can (and do in this case) have a drastic effect on the presentation of the same song. That is surely obvious. If a rhythm guitar and bass and drums are all panned centrally and turned up loud this will make a song come across differently than if the rhythm guitar was mixed low and to one side and the low frequencies of the bass and drums were reduced, for example. I don’t see how that is arguable. This is why mixing engineers exist. This is why the mixing process exists. It is a crucial aspect of presenting material. A good mix can make a recording. A bad mix can ruin it.

However you seem to be dismissisimg mixing variations as “alright since the songs themselves are varied.” You also said “nothing is nullified.” Your posts appear to be saying that what matters is the material and that the mixing is insignificant in having an effect on how the material is conveyed, at least where the material itself is varied. Is that the point you are making or not? Maybe I’m stupid and need you to spell it out for me. If so, please do.

If it is the point you are making, I totally disagree. Sensitive and intelligent mixing will preserve, if not enhance, variations and dynamics and colour, not erode them or homogenise the material. It is my view that the mixing on the stereo remix homogenises the material. It is my view that this detracts significantly from the presentation of the material. It is my view that this a bad thing.

 

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree my man.

 

White Album : consequences?
Sgt Pepper 50th Anniversary definitely opened up the door for the 50th White Album Anniversary ( Pepper 50 sold) likewise the WA50. There will be a drool fest when there's more details / songs / bonus tracks etc, later in the year, 2018.

 

It will be financialdisasterfest!

 

Best to scrimp and save.