Fair enough; on the other side of it, did anyone on the inside say it was unintentional? I don’t think there’s any rock solid proof either way. Far as what Paul and Ringo approved….I wonder how much they actually “approved” prior to the remix being finalized. They basically seem to go along with any changes that give the albums a fresh feel. I honestly don’t feel they concern themselves too much with preparatory specifics.
I think the important thing about the vintage mono and stereo LPs of SPLHCB was the fact that each side is 20 minutes long - that would have been deemed an important factor for hi-fi enthusiasts...!!! EMI top brass probably saw SPLHCB as their entrant in the rock music hi-fi stakes (as Decca would have, with "Days Of Future Passed" by The Moody Blues). Tracks from the '67 HTM tube cut stereo have speed differences when compared to the same tracks from '70s solid state stereo cuts, as well... Something I wrote up in early 2017 - The Beatles she's leaving home correct speed mono or stereo | Page 5 | Steve Hoffman Music Forums The stereo version of She's Leaving Home, if you speed it up by 4.73 per cent in a audio editing program like Audacity, will more or less correlate with the mono version in pitch and tempo (it's hard to obtain an exact synchronization unless you want to send yourself half-mad in the process!). (The track then becomes 8/10ths of a semi-tone higher as a result of the change). I was a bit bored recently and went to the effort of comparing each track from the the '87 CD to each track from the mono CD and found that I had to make the following changes to make the stereo versions more or less correlate with the mono versions: 01 Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (slowed down by 0 point 175 per cent to match mono master) 02 With A Little Help From My Friends (slowed down by 0 point 175 per cent to match mono master) 03 Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds (slowed down by 2 point 28 per cent to match mono master) 04 Getting Better (slowed down by 0 point 149 per cent to match mono master) 05 Fixing A Hole (speeded up by 0 point 025 per cent to match mono master) 06 She's Leaving Home (speeded up by 4 point 73 per cent to match mono master) 07 Being For The Benefit Of Mr Kite! (slowed down by 0 point 25 per cent to match mono master) 08 Within You, Without You (slowed down by 0 point 58 per cent to match mono master) 09 When I'm 64 (slowed down by 1 point 396 per cent to match mono master) 10 Lovely Rita (slowed down by 1 point 72 per cent to match mono master) 11 Good Morning, Good Morning (slowed down by 0 point 20 per cent to match mono master) 12 Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band (reprise) (slowed down by 0 point 164 per cent to match mono master) 13 A Day In The Life (slowed down by 0 point 164 per cent to match mono master) The side one tracks of the mono version totals 19 m 41 s, the side two tracks of the mono version totals 19 m 59 s (for an overall total of 39 m 40 s). The side one tracks of the stereo version totals 19 m 49 s, the side two tracks of the mono version totals 19 m 56 s (for an overall total of 39 m 45 s). When the stereo versions are adjusted to correlate with the mono versions as above: The side one tracks of the adjusted stereo version totals 19 m 45 s, the side two tracks of the adjusted stereo version totals 20 m 03 s (for an overall total of 39 m 48 s). I thought I'd share this, as the minimal timing variations between the three versions of each side of the album is either an uncanny coincidence or has been brilliantly designed! I'm guessing that there must have been a conscious decision to keep the length of each side at twenty minutes or less for the sake of keeping the album as hi-fi as possible. paul62, Jan 20, 2017
It will be interesting to see if the influence of Geoff Emerick on the "Revolver" era tracks is played down or diminished in the PR campaign (and in any essays the SDE booklet will contain), given the current legal conflict his estate is having with Calderstone Productions...
I really enjoy his remixing choices and don't mind the methods he has employed so far, personally I hope he keeps just doing what he has been doing
Of course it doesn't My point being not against his opinion about the mix, but against it being presented as fact. Nice that there's a Beatles thread on a new album, good to see the same people saying the same things again, prepping themselves for when they actually can hear something, and then say the same thing again. It's almost like they never actually listen
And if it's a stretch on YouTube video, imagine what it would be like in headphones and or a good system.
Just because a producer delivered a mix, whilst under the pressure to meet a deadline, which is true of both 1965 albums, doesn't mean he was satisfied with them. He might have been, but equally he might have felt rushed.
Did he? I remember reading someone claimed that he did say to somebody that it was deliberate, apparently to sell even more copies (but mono version of white album wasn't even released in US). I mean he might've just say something to go along with the interviewer's question, like, "oh yeah we totally did that on purpose" just to you know, add some wood into the fire. On that 321 McCartney thing when Rubin put up the bass part from While My Guitar Gently Weeps, Paul was surprised at first but then said something like "we experimented". I think there are so many mixing differences in white album is because of the way the recording sessions went, with simultaneous recording and mixing of different songs being done in different studios, and just the amount of the songs - twice the number they usually had, but in the same time period they spent on Sgt. Pepper, and that one already had mixing differences in every track as well.
PJ adresses this. The AI can not seperate two guitars. Help 87 was a little bit narrower. Rubber Soul 87 was about 50% narrower, enough for it to connect better as a headphone listen.
I remember reading that they had fun creating little differences deliberately for the above mentioned reason. It may be Ken Scott you are referring to? Abbey Road Engineer Ken Scott Says The Beatles' White Album Sessions Were a "Blast" For me this does make very much sense. Why would they suddenly care for both mixes and not play around with it? I believe I have read
I actually know what @batdude means; I first heard/owned Pepper as a just-turned 11 year old in late '67. It was the stereo album played from a small phonograph. The backup vocals which come in during the bridge are so well blended into the overall mix that while you're sensing something is there, it didn't blatantly come through to me as actual backup voices. I don't recall how soon after I picked up on them but it wasn't instantaneous (and they do jump out more in the mono mix).
Yes, Paul said something along those lines. It makes sense, especially in the flaring differences between both mixes of the White Album. Wow, that's brutally honest. But then it fits with what you hear in some of those stereo mixes.
Didn't Paul veto the first attempt at the White Album remix? I think I read that. I think in Rubber Soul he also moved some elements towards the center in a few songs. For example, vocals in Drive My Car.
There was certainly a Giles quote about how he was told to be braver and more adventurous, or words to that effect, after an initial mix of the White Album was rejected.
How about that Giles! He’s the first person ever to get a job opportunity based on a family or friend connection! That makes everything he has done in his career crap and not worthy of consideration.
I subscribe to Apple Music and the ATMOS re mixes of 50’s and early sixties material can be very interesting and insightful. Not always, but often enough. Nina Simone, early Aretha, Supremes, Temptations, Billie Holliday etc
If you have 5.1 set up, then the decoder will adapt the Atmos stream to that. So you can enjoy the surround mix but you won’t get the full Atmos “sound dome” effect without the height channels.
…also to @A well respected man …I heard Paul say a few times about wanting Giles not to hold back as it were; I wasn’t aware if he had categorically rejected a previous remix.
Yes, I expect a 5.1 set up will effectively show off the new mixes. Just temper expectations, there won’t be a lot of discrete instrument placements. What you get in the new mixes is more space to hear instrumental details. Since almost all recordings of this era were captured live on the floor of the studio, the surround mixes convey in a more realistic way the sound of what it was like in that room.
Right, thanks for the Ken Scott quote. Interesting, I woder which mix differences were deliberate and which were mistakes/oversights (like the bass appearing later in Sexy Sadie mono or very distorted plane outro in Back in the USSR stereo for example).
It very much depends on the song. Norwegian Wood is just as wide as the original mix. Yesterday is *wider* than the original mix. Yes, some songs were narrowed a bit, but it's clear there was no across the board decision to narrow things or somehow make things "better" on headphones. Not that making things more narrow makes them sound better on headphones anyway.
Does anyone have an example of noticeable guitar separation (separation of 2 or more electric or acoustic guitars) via de-mixing?
