"The Beatles (The White Album)" sound quality

When The White Album first came out, I didn’t like Revolution Nine. I used to argue with Beatle fans about it.
I told them that The Beatles were simply not in the same league as Frank Zappa. But nowadays, at age 62,
when I listen to The Beatles, it’s usually to hear Revolution Nine or side two of Yellow Submarine.

 

Do you really think Lennon/McCartney did not have access to new releases by their competitors while they were in India?
Besides that the mentioned records were released several months before they went to in Rishikesh. And they even played guitar with Mike Love there. Quite unlikely that all these artists wouldn't have been influenced by each other.

 

I think you're right..it's the most cohesive sounding version.

 

You misunderstood..I'm agreeing with you. Yes, definitely too low on the original. It's a highlight on the remixed album is what I meant.

 

OMG, thank you for the laugh!

 

Thanks for clarifying. I agree it was the song moat improved by the remix.

 

Well, I don't think you would hear 10hz or 16hz for that matter but you'd certainly feel the low frequency energy vibrating your organs and everything around them.

 

Txs guys. It was time for another listen....

Played the 2018 version, the '09 version & the mono '09 version. Loved them all.

 

If we put aside what technically constitutes "great sound quality", I think there's a certain charming likeability to the low-fi quality on a lot of the mono tracks.

 

I'm this close to pulling out my mono LP......

 

Guess what? A Toronto band did actually perform THE WHITE ALBUM track for track, note for note one night. And someone has a mono board board boot of the show. At some night club on day many bands decided to perform every Beatle album live. It was performed by many talented Southern Ontario bands. I guess that makes RN9 a song... of sorts. Damn!

 

It's a cool transition to hear the mono version of Helter Skelter with the stereo outro tacked on.

 

A gazillion dollars? There's a shop around here that has three mint, possibly unplayed copies (two of them imports) of that wooden box set for $175 each.

 

A Bat can hear 5 - 100 000 hz, which is right up into the AM radio band. Poor little guys... Our hearing is 20 - 20 000 hz at best. Test shows most people are 30 - 18 000 hz. And by the time you reach 50 you hearing is probably 40 - 16 000 hz.
I had mine tested a year ago. It is 30 - 18 000 hz.
Some rare individuals have shown to have remarkable hearing from 15 hz to 22 000 hz. Like one in million! We are talking about 7 year old kids here and not adults. Sir George Martin suffered really bad hearing loss in his later years. He couldn't hear anything above 8 khz. This is when he stopped mixing.

Very true. Infrasonic bass below 20 hz (for many people below 30 hz) would not be heard, only felt. In fact infrasonic bass at loud levels can be dangerous. Our bodies have not evolved to handle such low frequencies. 7 - 10 hz will cause migraines. Push out enough infrasonic bass at 120 - 140 SPL and it may cause internal organs to explode, rupture; or cause your heart to stop. The U.S. military even looked into infrasonic frequencies as a weapon. Unfortunately all frequencies below 80 hz are omnidirectional. You couldn't aim the weapon in any one direction. Say at an ex-girlfriend for example.

I glad you brought this up. Although many speakers brag / claim frequency down to 20 hz very few actually deliver. Worse yet 95 % of Subwoofers that claim they are - 3 db @ 16 hz can't swing that spec either. The exception are professional subwoofers..

Back in 1988 I was a security guard at the Toronto, Fairview Mall when they were building the movie cinema. I was present that day when they put the subwoofer in. It was a big sealed wooden box the size of a Ford F-1 truck with two 18 inch drivers in the front. No ports or circuit tricks. All passive. It was driven by external amps. I asked one of the guys installing it, "How low did the subwoofer go?"

These guys were from JBL. He answered, "Well it's pretty flat. - 3 db @ 14 hz at 130 SPL. It can take up to 5000 watts RMS.... Our subwoofer has the lowest infrasonic bass distortion in the business. Once you get below 30 hz most subwoofers lose it to distortion. At 20 hz bass distortion can easily go to 10 %, even higher..." He said a lot more but that is all I can remember.

Back in 1990 Velodyne claimed that their top of the line subwoofer could reach to 10 hz. Their designs were unique. Instead of the forward firing drivers, Velodyne put their driver down firing having it couple with the floor. Normally you would want speakers to decouple with the floor. As in spiked. The idea with this design was to achieve very low frequency reponse at high levels with low distortion, by using the floor and walls as part of the subwoofer.

Today the easiest way to achieve superb below 30 hz performance is to construct a powered Infrasonic subwoofer. One quick search on Utube will confirm this. ⁷Many are "How to" videos. Of course you would need a 30 hz or 20 hz high pass filter.

A cousin of mine has a such a setup. His 7.1 Dolby Atmos set up is a sight to see. 12 top of the line B & W speakers. 8 for the 7 channels. He had 2 speakers for his center channels instead of a wide dialog speaker. And he has 4 speakers on his ceiling for the Dolby Atmos. His subwoofer his a professional Mackie. The infrasonic sub he built himself. That takes over from the Mackie at 30 hz. Steven says it is flat to 8 hz. I have no idea how you would go about measuring bass that low. Steven has an infrasonic frequency generator. Apparently infrasonic frequencies are generated from higher bass fundamentals. A 15 hz lower harmonics are generated from say a low B (32 hz) on a 5 string electric bass. I don't really understand the technology. Whatever notes are hit the generator can produce up to 2 more octaves of lower harmonics. What is it like? Well, it makes your bowels loose, makes your skin itch. Truth is bass that low shakes your bones. And not in a nice way. But each to his own.

 

Interestingly, the Germans (who retained UK's unbanded concepts of Sgt Pepper and Abbey Road) went astray from the UK original concept as far as WA was concerned. I blame Revolution 9 for this (the thought that you can't skip it on an unbanded record).

 

I still favor the MFSL LP for more reasons than just the sound quality...

 

...such as....?

 

other than EQ.... no edits, adjustment, fixes, and everything else the current remasters are...they are not pure...even the MONO CD box has edits, fixes...and the stereo box is louder then the MFSL LPs...

 

India in 1967 was primitive compared with the West. No, the nearest record store would have been 100 miles away.

 

Good point. But you can't compare vinyl volume to CD volume. Also the the stereo box, like all compact disks in the last 23 years are normalized.

Just EQ?! The MFSL CDs have WAY too much EQ. And the MMT album is from a 4th generation master! LOL

* 1967 Abbey Road makes a copy of the tracks and sends them to Capitol Records.

* Capitol Records makes a copy with EQ and reverb/ADT effects to create stereo for the few tracks that are mono only. This fudges up copy tape will now be the Captiol master for the new MMT stereo record.

* Sometime in the 1970's Parlophone wants to release MMT as an album. Do they make their own? Nope. They request a copy of the record from Capitol.

* Now much later MFSL requests The Beatle masters which includes this tape.

 

I did this for friend when I made him a copy of the Mono CD Box. But I never told him the inferior mix of the song doesn't include the cool ending.

 

I love the MFSL WA...it's mine to enjoy.

 

That's not the point. It's about the Beatles having access to releases by their competitors. People who think they were completely cut off from the world are wrong in my opinion.
And like I said - the mentioned records came out in December 1967 and Mike Love was there with them... why wouldn't they have been influenced? Very unlikely they would not have been influenced by other current music.

 

My bad. I thought you were talking about The Beatles not being able to get new Western records in India. You could back in 1967, but not were the Beatles were hiding out


Gotcha ya!

 

No argument there but keep in mind that the MFSL White Album has lots of EQ on it. It is far from the master or even a copy. Just sayin'......