"The Beatles (The White Album)" sound quality

I've heard the 1987 CD, the 2009 CD, and I'm currently listening to the 2014 mono vinyl of this particular record. It's got some fantastic songs on it, but man, what happened during the recording of this music? It's quite a departure from the posh sound of the previous albums. Even Please Please Me sounds miles above this record in sound quality. Probably the worst song on this record as far as sound quality goes is "The Continuing Story of Bungalow Bill." I mean, seriously?? It's hilarious how bad it sounds, really!

I'm aware of how bad the internal politics of the band were during this period, but I can't imagine Abbey Road Studios, the same facilities that would go on to produce The Dark Side of the Moon, could possibly produce such a poor sounding record for the biggest rock group in the world. Does anyone know?

 

I don't agree with this being a poorly recoded album. The mix is rougher and the production far less polish than previous albums, but that's not the same as a poorly recorded album, which The White Album isn't.

 

The White Album sounds great.

 

George Martin threw a hissy fit and went on holidays halfway through the recording so they had to match his production to Chris Thomas'. Sides 2 and 3 are too long for optimum fidelity. That's why they chopped off a bit of Helter Skelter and sped up Ringo's song on the mono. Putting all that into perspective it sounds great.

 

IMO: They were imitating the feel of Dylan and The Band's lo-fi "Basement Tapes" from late '67-early-'68. Many have scoffed at this heretical notion, but no one has convinced me otherwise.

 

Run out and get the 1978 UK white vinyl stereo version, which has been mentioned in the forums (and by our host) numerous times. Well worth the extra coin - it is stunning.

And the Russian Antrop is pretty nice as well. Lots of rumors swirl around that one, but the version I have simply sounds great.

 

The back to basics sound of The Beach Boys' "Wild Honey" and Dylan's "John Wesley Harding" are far more likely examples.

 

I don't follow, the production wasn't as complicated as some of the Pepper stuff, but it sounds good to my ears, I love Dear Prudence and Martha My Dear...its nothing like the Basement Tapes, which I don't even think were that well known when the Beatles were recording the White Album (and don't really hear anything that would make you take that viewpoint anyway)...Yer Blues is a long way from the Basement tapes.. I hear it more as a mixture of different styles, but a fun record (at least till Revolution #9 come on). Weren't they popping back and forth between four tracks and eight tracks when they made this...

 

Yes, I believe they were. Wikipedia has also told me that the 8-track machine used at Abbey Road wasn't officially supposed to be installed in the studio, so I wonder if the worse-sounding songs on the record are due to an engineer's lack of experience with a potentially unstable machine... Then again, I could be talking out of my bum.

 

"Far more likely" in your opinion. Okay.

 

Some tracks sound great but others do not - "The Continuing Story of Bungalow Bill" is a good example of one of the worst sounding tracks.
I guess it was due to the fact that the album was recorded over a long period of time (while an album like 'Please Please Me' was recorded in 20 minutes, hence the even sound quality) and that they switched between using four-track and eight-track machine.
Furthermore, it was also during the 'White Album' sessions that The Beatles began to show an interest in stereo so switching between mono mixes and stereo mixes may also has played a part.
I guess that is also why some tracks sound better in mono than stereo and the other way around....

 

You have to know whether or not they had a Bootleg copy as soon as the BTs got out, because they weren't commercially released until 75.

Unless Bob sent the Basement Tapes to the Beatles????!!!!

I keed, I keed...

 

I prefer the George Harrison remixed version.

 

And which version is this??

 

#9 has its place.

Really interesting to hear the work tapes, #9 was edited out of the same take as #1...they (and Yoko) really went on a tangent there. It's quite possibly the most uncompromising popular music ever released, even more so than Metal Machine Music, IMHO - I mean, it's THE BEATLES!!

 

I always thought the Let It Be sessions were more Basement Tapes-inspired - a highly contrived attempt to get back to their roots and away from the professionalism of the studio and the siloing that took place particularly in the White Album. "Rooftop Concert" almost seemed to be an admission of a thematic play on the Basements. Unfortunately the end result pretty much had the inverse effect of revitalization and basically broke up the band. Good thing they got their swan song before it all ended, with that album named after the studio they were trying to escape.

Guess that's another thread though. White Album sounds wonderful for what it is.

 

They needed a BREAK.

They barely had a month off from the strained and hectic White Album sessions before reconvening at Twickenham for the ill-fated 'Get Back' project...

 

Is that the one in the Blue Box from 1978? I have that one.

 

Don't understand this discussion.

UK early press stereo and mono both sound great. It was manufactured in the sixties when you couldn't make two separate recordings that came out exactly the same due to the comparatively complicated processes involved. Every separate trial had its exclusive audio which was a big part of the record's identitiy and charm. I'll take even the worst results of that before today's digital standards. Analog anytime!

 

Wonderful recording that just takes off like an airplane from the first song, and into Dear Prudence you know the sound quality is there with those ringing acoustic guitars.

Then that slow version of Revolution just rocks so smoothly. I think I can hear drumsticks clicking together on it, the sound is just perfect. The Beatles become an "underground" group in one sweep.

I should pull one of my UK '78 white vinyl copies out soon and play it. I've been hording many copies of it to sell off in a few years for $400.00 each.

 

For the most part, the sound is claustrophobic, little "room" sound sneaking into the mix, lots of mouth noises thanks to the close mikes. Close, dry and for the first time a little 'transistory' sounding. Naturally this works best in "Revolution #9'.

 

"It's the bloody Beatles white album, shut up! LOLOLOL

 

The White Album definitely has a sound of its own. Most likely a combination of various things, such new recording gear and associated new methods (i.e. the "unapproved" 8-track machine), Chris Thomas' production on many of the songs, the individual writers having their say and way more than on any album prior, the playing of the band (being more group like), maybe a conscious decision by the group to strip back their sound and be less "produced" than Pepper, the songs themselves (given a lot were written in India on acoustic guitars) and the start of the breakdown of the relationships between the four.

I hear the White Album as a tougher, sparser sounding record (not in a bad way, just the feel and sound) than the fuller and smoother Pepper. For want of a metaphor (albeit a poor one) I view the White Album as a hexagon and Pepper as a circle. With Abbey Road, they went back to a circle.

 

Sounds fint to me. It's one of those albums that does not easily give away it's period by the sound. Beatles For Sale sounds very much like a 1964 album. White Album could be an album recorded way up through the 70s.

 

Funny how subjective this can be. I was listening to the White Album from the new mono box the other day and I was thinking how good it sounded. It gave me a new appreciation for Long, Long, Long.