Why Giles Won’t Remix Rubber Soul/Revolver

I was close.

I've always thought, the stereo mix of "Taxman" is what it is. I personally prefer the mono, but I wouldn't want to replace the OG stereo with a Franken-mix with "widen" drums and guitars in the center. Giles is smart to leave it alone.

 

OK, we’re on the same page. I thought you were arguing that their plan is to replace the original mixes with the remixes. And Giles has been adamant that this is not happening. I do agree that regardless of what’s causing the global shortage of Beatles CDs, Universal is probably placing a lot less emphasis on getting the “anniversary” albums back into production since there are still remixes of those out there for people who don’t care about such things. I agree there’s no rhyme or reason as to availability right now. I can’t buy a CD of Rubber Soul right now but my local WalMart has five stereo vinyl copies sitting on the shelf.

 

To me most of Rubber Soul in Stereo is worse than Taxman. Due to track configuration, there isn't much that could have been done to improve it really.
There are quite a few tracks on Rubber Soul which could be improved IMHO. The Yellow Submarine Soundtrack remix of "Nowhere Man" is a good example.

 

Is that not what @Man at C&A is still arguing?

I have no knowledge of what is considered "in print" or not, but it seemed like the 2009 versions of the albums given remixes were generally unavailable before Covid.

That said, it's not as if I've closely tracked availability over the years.

While I don't find the stereo spread particularly ideal on Rubber Soul, I think it's otherwise a very good *sounding* mix, and one that clearly had effort put into it.

The YSS mixes sound pinched in comparison to me. The original mix of Think For Yourself already had the vocals split, so the YSS remix isn't really an improvement.

If there was a way to go back in time and pan things differently during the original mix sessions, I'd say go for it. But that's not what a new remix would be, and based on all of the post-1971 remixes I've heard thus far, I don't have any particular desire to hear such a thing.

 

I love your non judgmental post, and seeing you haven’t been on the forum very long, I can look forward to more positive, insightful posts from you in the future!

 

I am, but to be honest, it doesn't really matter. It's late and I've had a very stressful day...

I actually really like the original stereo Rubber Soul with all it's weird separation. It's all I had Rubber Soul on until the 2014 mono box and what I'm used too. I've only heard it in mono two or three times and the 1987 mix not much more. I found the 2014 great but a bit too bassy. On first play it surprised me how bass there is on that record. I've never heard an original.

 

to my mind... there is NO reason to remix ANY of the Beatles catalogue if Rubber Soul & Revolver are considered OK in their current state. The early albums you make peace with.... the post Pepper albums sound relatively modern. So to leave well enough alone is the prevailing attitude. But IF one has remixed Pepper through Let It Be under the understanding that the "sound of the(early to mid) 60s" is heard by music consumers today as oldies music and that tweaks and upgraded mixes could encourage modern listeners to listen to more Beatles music on the equipment that they use today and with a modern sound profile.

By THAT logic... Rubber Soul and Revolver and perhaps even HELP! become no brainers IF the demix technology can deliver true separation with high fidelity. Peter Jackson said the technology was being improved and delivering better results as he used it. In light of that... if certain early Beatle mixes like She Loves You or A Hard Day's Night can be recovered and brought into greater fidelity then it just seems that it ought to be done. But even if that isn't done... the two mid period albums that contain the heart of the Beatles catalog would seem automatic for a remix. This is all depending on how far the technology/AI has really come.

 

Does availability on download and streaming sites count as "in print"? Because all the 2009 stereo remasters are available on iTunes and Apple Music.

 

He was initially arguing that the original mixes of Pepper, White Album, Abbey Road and Let It Be were being allowed to go out of print and were being “replaced” by the remixes — which doesn’t make sense economically for Apple/Universal and is contrary to what Giles has said repeatedly. But as you can see above he now says, “Of course they aren't deleting the albums completely, but they are at least temporarily deleting the original versions as and when the remixes come out.”

According to Universal and The Beatles’ own website, it’s clear that (1) the original mixes are still considered in print, and (2) the original mixes and almost all of The Beatles’ albums on CD are sold out, or “out of stock” at many retailers.

So I totally understand the concern; but I don’t think there’s any evidence the original mixes of the anniversary albums are being deleted. No question they’re sold out at many retailers, but that’s true of almost all their albums. And I think he’s right that the anniversary albums are probably last on the list to get back on store shelves because remixes of those still circulate.

I do think there’s one album where new remixes really were created to replace
the originals — and that’s the “1” album. The remix of that album has clearly replaced the original album on both CD and vinyl. But of course that’s a compilation album and the original mixes of those 27 songs are on other albums.

 

Right: he’s still saying they are letting the original mixes go out of print.

 

Boooo

 

On download and streaming as well. The version of 1 with the original mixes is just … gone.

 

On Taxman, you could split out the vocals wide with instrumentation center, like early Beach Boys records and many of Ron Furmanek's remixes like for the Hollies. I have heard a lot of dissent to this idea because it's not a realistic portrayal of the stereo landscape, but I've never really looked at stereo recordings that way. I always saw them as their own thing, like a playground to experiment and create something that can sound magical to the ears, which is all that really matters in the end. Wide stereo vocals really achieve that effect I think. The stereo remix at the beginning of the Anthology DVD series of "In My Life" is really nice, probably a bit too much reverb and could have been mastered better, but gives a nice sound. I was able to make a dry stereo mix of "Nowhere Man" with the vocals out wide using the Yellow Submarine 5.1 stems that sounds fantastic.

 

*Any* stereo mix is necessarily not going to be "a realistic portrayal of the stereo landscape", but split vocals sometimes lose impact. Sometimes they work, but sometimes they don't.

Alas, we can't know their reason for doing so, but it's worth noting that the mix of take 11 on Anthology 2 has the same basic panning (albeit without the bass filtering on the Revolver stereo mix):

 

I would definitely avoid splitting the vocals too wide if you have enough tracks for a balanced backing track. It might be a bit jarring if say, Rubber Soul, was completely mixed in that wide-vocal mix. I think the more backing vocalists, the better it works as you can hear the harmonies in a more invigorating fashion. Splitting single-tracked harmonies is usually less so. Although I do love the stereo mix of "Here, There and Everywhere".

 

I grew up with the US stereo version of RS, Y&T, and Revolver. In the late 80s, I bought the CDs. When The Beatles in Mono CD set came out, I bought it. When the Beatles Stereo CD box set came out, I bought that one too. I'm sure that there are a few more versions out there of RS and Revolver. Forgive my ignorance about it, but what exactly are remix advocates wanting in a remix that's not there in previous versions?

 

I would say to make use of previous generations to allow more mixing options and to get "closer" to the band, in a way. That's what made a Sgt. Pepper remix such an appealing idea. Revolver has a handful of songs which may really benefit as well. Not so much for Rubber Soul, but Soul was intentionally mixed in an awkward fashion so it could be folded down into mono, a reason which has aged poorly. A remix of Rubber Soul from the four-track could be nice if they tried to approach it from a 60's perspective. Rubber Soul, Revolver and Sgt. Pepper are the only three albums I feel could benefit from a proper remix. (Edit: The blu-ray mixes of Magical Mystery Tour perk my ears as well)

That being said, I am more than happy with the original mixes and will be for the rest of my life. You can't replicate mixes made on the original equipment used to record the songs, that sound is forever what the Beatles will be, and no remix will change that.

 

Another irony about modernizing Beatle recordings (if you all don't mind )...

don't know how many of you are into recording yourselves...

but it's pretty common to want to make modern recording old fashioned and analog. Tons of "vintage" instruments, plus digital plugins to dirty up the sound and attempt to give it that old school flavor. Plus vsits that re-create old instruments and sounds, not to mention old recording and mixing techniques.

Audio Products - Abbey Road Studios
EastWest - Fab Four

Funny, init?

 

Yeah, ultimately I think that there is no way that the original mixes of the anniversary albums will be "deleted" from availability in every form in existence. These are the most famous recordings in rock history

 

Permanently? Probably not. But various original mixes have already gone out of print for extended periods of time. The original stereo mixes of Help! and Rubber Soul were mostly out of print between 1987 and 2009 (and then only available in the mono box), the stereo mixes of PPM, WTB, AHDN, and BFS were mostly out of print during that same time period, and the mono mixes were mostly out of print between the late '60s and 1987 (first 4) or 2009 (rest of the catalog).

The only saving grace these days is out of print material is generally more accessible thanks to things like eBay and Discogs...if you care enough to look for it.

 

That is true, and ideally the originals would always be easily available in any format. However I am resting easy knowing that the originals most likely will not be "George Lucas'd" where the original trilogy of Star Wars is not available in any way, shape, or form save for fan restorations or digital rips of the digitized Laserdisk transfer from years back

 

This remix was extremely well done and of high quality, just like the rest of them for sure! I want Giles to do every single Beatles album that exists, plus every solo record from the '70s from all of them too. They are fantastic

 

The Beatles were not that dynamic to begin with. The '87 and '09s have similar dynamics.

 

Do you need further explanation, sir?

 

Have you ever dealt with the elderly? I think you can make allowances for George Martin saying that. Whether he remembers them or not, I prefer them. You never answered my question about previous movie mixes of If I Fell.