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. Diamond Star Halo

    Diamond Star Halo Forum Resident

    Location:
    Vancouver
    The original stereo mix is terrible. Lets get real here and call it what it is: amateur. It sounds like a 5 year old was given free reign on the mixing board to press random buttons and slide faders up and down as he pleased.

    Personally, I cannot accept mono as the definitive version either. I don't like the claustrophobic sound of most mono mixes. Although I will concede that Mono Sgt Pepper is miles better than the original stereo.
     
    Shaddam IV and enro99 like this.
  2. mpayan

    mpayan A Tad Rolled Off

    Im not that big a fan of the stereo mix either. Im not going to pretend its the most awesome original mix either.

    I simply think that this remix has a lot of issues and that the liberties to make it sound modern went a direction that it didnt have to in order to accomplish a more simplistic approach.

    But Im a fan of Steven Wilson and his philosophy. Doing a remix is very difficult thing to balance no doubt. And I dont think that the correct people are doing the Beatles remixes.
     
    MicJames and superstar19 like this.
  3. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    I don't care about who bought what format, though. I mean who bought the album, period.
     
    Psychedelic Good Trip likes this.
  4. daveidmarx

    daveidmarx Forem Residunt

    Location:
    Astoria, NY USA
    I tend to believe that it (the tape ramp up) was a deliberate "peek behind the curtain", so to speak to show the facade of the Sgt. Pepper premise. Sort of like the scene in The Wizard Of Oz when Toto pulls back the curtain to reveal that the Wizard was just a man. I was hoping that Giles would include it in the new mix and was really disappointed when I discovered he didn't. :shake:
     
    melo85 and Al_D like this.
  5. Dee Zee

    Dee Zee Once Upon a Dream

    Well it's been two weeks since Peppermania struck. I've listened to the various mixes on my big stereo, my small Bose in the kitchen and in my car. But the one mix I really like is the blu-ray Dolby True HD 5.1 with the rear speakers up about 6dB. That mix I really enjoy on my rather modest system.
     
    andrewskyDE and Guy R like this.
  6. DrJ

    DrJ Senior Member

    Location:
    Davis, CA, USA
    Ok - I do care about this stuff though - I'm curious as to whether maybe I'm wrong and some younger people are buying the physical media
     
    Psychedelic Good Trip likes this.
  7. fitzysbuna

    fitzysbuna Senior Member

    Location:
    Australia
    what do you mean by "heavy handed" ?
     
  8. Tommyboy

    Tommyboy Senior Member

    Location:
    New York
    It is one thing to not to like the remix, but to say that the "mystery is gutted", is perhaps a wee bit over the top. The original stereo mix is lopsided and was done on the fly. There is nothing magical about it.

    It's still the same album, still the same running order of songs. The unbidden texture and colors of sound in this remix enhance the listening experience for me, regardless of the fact that it was loudified.
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2017
  9. FVDnz

    FVDnz Forum Resident

    I really want to check out the vinyl version of the remix, as I understand it doesn't have all the compression of the CD?! Apparently the Bluray has the same master as the CD, yeah? That's really disappointing if true! A vinyl rip would be nice, for one that doesn't own a turntable but it's clearly on the wishlist for now.
     
    MicJames likes this.
  10. Very good, insightful post on the whole, but I'm at a loss as to how the raw, unmixed 'original working tapes' should act as a reference as to how a mix should sound? A mix is a mix, and elements within the working tapes are always adjusted during a mix to bring out the key elements in the track and for overall tonal balance among those disparate elements. It will always in the end sound like a much different animal than the raw tracks.

    IMHO, the original Pepper mono mix did this to virtual perfection, and I don't think has been improved upon via any of the subsequent re-masterings/remixes that have since been issued - including the ones under discussion in this thread.

    The 'loud' comment by Giles regarding the original working tapes you referred to is also a head scratcher. It's always the goal of any recording endeavor to saturate the tape for the best possible signal-to-noise ratio on any individual recorded track (without of course going too far into the red and ending up with audible distortion), and then adjusting levels downward for the mix where appropriate. Given the general excellence of the Beatles' engineering crew, it would surprise me greatly if the raw tracks for Pepper were to any noticeable degree 'louder' than those of any of their other recordings.
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2017
    enro99 and DrJ like this.
  11. bibijeebies

    bibijeebies vinyl hairline spotter

    Location:
    Amstelveen (NL)
    I fail to see what the loudness has to do with the excellence of the Beatles' engineering crew.
    You should focus in this regard on the artists themselves. They decide on how they like it to sound.
     
  12. Mike Dow

    Mike Dow I kind of like the music

    Location:
    Bangor, Maine
    Just a random note about the remix which is very evident in the stereo and surround versions: Opening up 'Good Morning Good Morning,' as Giles has done here, reveals that Ringo is a BEAST on this track, while the horns sound almost like they were recorded (or EQ'd) in a way not dissimilar to how Ken Scott and Brian Gibson juiced the brass on 'Savoy Truffle.' An amazing sound.
     
  13. Thick deep bass Too thick and heavy bottom opposed to the open outtakes that are balanced better and probably flat transfers that are not at all compressed like much of the remix.

    I was pn a flight yesterday and listened to everything on headphones for the first time. Most of the remix is too thick Within You stands out but The title song and Mr Kite especially, play like a wall of thick sound I wish the remix was more open. Yes everything is clear but I'll take the original sound of the stereo mix over this new one. Fun to have but a missed opportunity imho. . .
     
  14. MicJames

    MicJames Forum Resident

    Location:
    Seattle
    I wonder how much of the thick and unlistenable-y dense is from the remix and how much is from the compression added to the digital media.

    I.e., is there considerably more air and separation in the pre-limited mix on the vinyl? If so, putting the uncompressed version on the hi-rez discs is the real tragedy / lost opportunity here.
     
    formu_la likes this.
  15. rstamberg

    rstamberg Senior Member

    Location:
    Riverside, CT
    The whole enchilada sounds great to me, 5.1 surround mixes included. So there.
     
  16. DrJ

    DrJ Senior Member

    Location:
    Davis, CA, USA
    Well I'm just saying if I'm an engineer working on a project that is by definition aiming for something different than the original mixes, I would let the sound and "feel" and impact of the original working tapes dictate the direction of the new (re) mix. I would not listen to the old, existing mixes and slavishly try to recreate those in this instance - MAYBE if there weren't good sounding digital versions of the original mixes available - but there are - so OK, try something different here, shed new/different light on an old masterwork by letting the working tapes dictate the approach.

    Giles when he described the original tapes as "loud" I suspect was saying they have a lot of slam, an "in your face" thing - which of course isn't the same as volume, but as we all know subjective volume/loudness of a recording is much different than actual volume, it has to do with all kinds of factors. And the key point is that kind of slam was completely NOT conveyed in the original stereo mixes of PEPPER - it sounds rather polite. And really only sort of conveyed in the original mono mixes, which are definitely more rocking but still rather murky (though I do love them, like you do - they are the original article and still hold up!), partly due to the technical limitations of the time.

    So I suspect that in creating the stereo remix Giles was at least in part aiming to convey that slam he heard on the working tapes - so, the sound of the original tapes dictated the overall direction of the remix - and Giles saw no point in simply trying to imitate the mono mix for stereo remix - yeah he used it as a reference point (since it clearly trounced the original stereo mix) but I'm glad he didn't feel he had to stop there and went beyond that to create something new, I suspect inspired by what he heard on those original working tapes. I see no reason for Giles to just randomly "mess with" the Beatles' catalog (except on a project like LOVE where the whole point is to do just that) - he seems like a thoughtful, earnest guy and I don't think would disrespect the Beatles' legacy or his FATHER's legacy for that matter. I have to assume that the sound of the stereo remix was inspired by working with the original tapes, their sound/feel.

    So that's what I meant, but of course I am speculating, and of course others may (and undoubtedly will, loudly) disagree! :laugh:
     
    Last edited: Jun 11, 2017
  17. Aquél que escala

    Aquél que escala New Member

    Location:
    Argentina
    Too ****ing loud
     
    supermd, gja586 and MicJames like this.
  18. The LP is better. But still compressed .
     
  19. Thank you for the thoughtful and well considered response to my previous reply. Actually, when I originally read that one of the purposes of the new project would be to somewhat emulate the power and impact of the original mono mix in a stereo format, I was very hopeful (and posted as such in this thread). But despite his best intentions (and I do agree that personally speaking, Giles seems like a thoughtful, earnest guy), I think he took the concept a bit too far and lost the overall feel and cohesiveness of the original work in the process.

    So my issue with him isn't intent, but rather one of aural judgement. In fact, based on the results both here and other past projects (including the recent Hollywood Bowl), I would have to say that there is a wide gulf between my own personal vision of what constitutes "good sounding audio" and his.

    But as his justly revered father used to often say, "horses for courses"...
     
    Maidenpriest, DrJ and Mazzy like this.
  20. MicJames

    MicJames Forum Resident

    Location:
    Seattle
    Some posters have suggested creating a less compressed stereo mix from mixing down the surround channels. I assume this is because the surround mixes are not compressed or at least not as compressed?

    I'm not up to speed on computer audio, so I don't understand exactly how that works.
     
    rstamberg likes this.
  21. crossroads69

    crossroads69 Senior Member

    Location:
    London Town
    Looking forward to hearing the unlimited LP version. I don't do vinyl but am for lookout for a good digital rip.
     
    MicJames likes this.
  22. MicJames

    MicJames Forum Resident

    Location:
    Seattle
    There was a short video posted way back in the thread in which one of the engineers mentioned the final mix was completed for the vinyl, then compressed for the digital to make it LOUD (he shouted the word). It was painful to watch.

    I have put some resources into my setup on the digital side to be able to spin hi-rez discs and send the signal at the original high resolution and reclocked to a tube DAC. My phono rig is quite pedestrian and also temporarily down.

    I bought the box for the blu-ray for critical listening, and like others here, was miffed the compressed version was included on there.

    I don't regret the purchase, because I am enjoying the outtakes, the mono, and some of the compressed remix, but I'd love to hear what it sounded like beforehand. Perhaps Apple will give me the option of buying a PCM download of the mix in the future, or I can get a quality vinyl rip of it somewhere.
     
  23. MicJames

    MicJames Forum Resident

    Location:
    Seattle
    Please let me know if you find a source? In an ideal world the label would make an uncompressed download available for those who purchase the box. I'd even pay additional money for it, even though they should have included it on one of the high rez discs to begin with.
     
  24. Kim Olesen

    Kim Olesen Gently weeping guitarist.

    Location:
    Odense Denmark.
    One poster mentioned that there is quite some untamed low end. And i can confirm that. And taming that low end while slightly de-essing the mix makes it easier on my (admittedly) aging ears.
     
    Gersh likes this.
  25. Yeah although I'm a bit disappointed with the remix I still love the box and feel the alt discs videos posters and book all together make this a must have package. I think the price was spot on for what is included. . I'll rarely listen to the remix cd and only the LP version.
     
    Lewisboogie and MicJames like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine