The original CDs from 1987 are junk. Everyone hated them for decades. The 2009 remasters are beautiful and crystal clear also closer to the master tapes.
I think it was great that we got the all the original vintage mixes in 2009 remastered in good taste. I’ve really enjoyed the Stereo Box over the years, just wish they’d also offered unlimited versions of the hi-res Remasters (like they did with the McCartney Remasters which I prefer). Ideally, they should’ve offered 2CD sets (original stereo & YSS style remixes) in 2009 but instead Apple decided to spread things out (first CD Remasters, then iTunes, then vinyl, etc.), a good business move. It was rumored that remixes of post 1965 albums were completed in 2007-08 by the Abbey Road team but never issued. It would’ve been interesting to hear the approach taken by that team compared to the Giles/O’Kell team that’s now doing the same.
Yeah, well, not to sound cynical or anything, but he would say that, wouldn't he? Especially if Apple tracked him down and slapped a cease and desist order on him or something. Doc Ebbetts may have said that, but I doubt even he really believed it, his work is still top notch IMO; for example as good as the 2009 mono remasters are I'll take Doc's mono Revolver over the 2009 any day. Hell, it's just a theory but I wouldn't be surprised if, not unlike the Ultra Rare Trax CDs being the main impetus for lashing together Anthology (or so I've heard/read), it was Doc Ebbetts and Purple Chick's work (and how successful it was) that lit a fire under Apple's butt to do the 2009 remasters. Absolutely g-ddamn right I always liked Beatles For Sale but only gained a true appreciation for the album once I heard the 2009 Stereo remaster. On headphones, no less. And yet the Songtrack has its share of detractors as well. Go figure, eh? Indeed, MHP. In addition to those threads, some of the newbies here would actually do well to plow the first few actual "2009 Beatles Remasters" discussions: It's Official! The Beatles Remasters Thread (Pt. 01) * Six months before the remasters were even released, you already had people saying "I'll keep my '87's, thanks." People actually based their opinions of the remasters on screenshots of f--king waveforms from 96kbps mp3 rips Trust yer ears indeed. IMO the 2009 remasters are what they are. No, they're not perfect by any stretch of the imagination but they could have been a helluva lot worse. Apple had the dice loaded against them from the get go because there was no way they would be able to keep the purists happy while catering to the iPod generation. I think people tend to forget that the 2009's were not necessarily being marketed towards baby boomers who already had a dozen different copies of the individual albums already. My verdict, eight and half years later? Ultimately I agree with the poster who said the first four stereo 2009's are keepers, keep the '87's for the remainder. I'll never forget playing the 2009 stereo White Album for the first time and saying, "Holy sh-t! Bass!" and by the end of the album saying "Yep...too much bass!" And Abbey Road was even worse... I don't think there's much question that when it comes to the 2009 remasters the mono box set was the real prize out of the lot.
Why not? The originals will always exist. That is, if the companies let them. There's only an issue if they're replaced, but if they're two separate versions staying around then I think it's great for people to have variety. Besides, some don't like mono.
I'm of the same mind. I don't know if anyone else has mentioned the packaging. The artwork on the original CD's from the 80's was an embarrassment; cropped photos scanned from old LP sleeves. The all-cardboard slipcases from 2009 weren't everyone's cup of tea, but I like them. I suppose that's some kind of delusional self-marketing, but what can I say? I'm visually-oriented and the physical interface with the 2009 CD's is 1000% better. I kept the old CD's, but I can't imagine ever listening to them again. I like the sound of both the 2009 reissues and the MONO box, although the original CD issues of Sgt. Pepper and The White Album didn't need any improvement. For some albums - Magical Mystery Tour among them - MONO is the only way to go, but in general, I play the MONO versions.
About the too much bass, I feel that way with Sgt. Pepper's 2009 remaster in particular. I'd be happy with the 50th fixing that among other things if not for destroying each song's unique sonic signature. The bass is too strong on most albums for my liking but on stuff like Lucy In the Sky it's just absurd.
In regard to the 2017 Pepper, as I recall from the one time I listened to it "Mr Kite" stood out as the song where the bass was way over the top. It reminded me of Wings Over America, where it sounds like the bass guitar is the most prominent instrument in the mix
I seem to remember him announcing his retirement before they came out but saying that the fact they were about to come out was the reason.
"When we're paying for something that is supposedly remastered or remixed, it should sound similar to stuff being released today"...
I enjoy the relatively more presence in the drums & bass on the 2009 stereo remasters. It gives the mixes bit more oomph and allows better appreciation of the Fab rhythm section.
The 2009 Stereo are not closer to the master tapes. As wonky willy pointed out earlier... "They are narrowed, over-EQ'd, there is spot NR all over the place, and they have digitally removed things they consider anomalies." I'd like to also add some compression/limiting to that list. Some of the 1987 discs such as the "White Album" are basically flat transfers of the master tapes. You can't get much closer than that. The first 4 are bad mono transfers, and the next 2 are the 1980's remixes so I don't count those. I realise that many prefer the sound of the 2009 versions, but to say they are "Closer to the master tapes" is simply not true.
I'm pretty much 100% in agreement with you here. I will say my one (minor) beef with the 2009 stereos is the packaging...I hate how the back covers are altered from the originals with different photos and layouts. I wish they'd done the same for them as they did the monos, or at least kept the original back covers. I still have all of my 1987 CDs as well, but I never listen to them any more.
I did and was surprised the amount of mastering compression used on both stereo and mono releases. Do you honestly believe the highly advocated and abruptly pulled off of shelves 6 months later 1983 CD release of Abbey Road is not as good as the 2009 release? I certainly don't. For the 80's CD's it's really a hit and miss scenario. The 1987 stereo Magical Mystery Tour is better than every other CD and the MFSL Vinyl pressing. The odd thing really is that that 1983 Abbey Road CD sounds identical to the MFSL Vinyl. Except for MMT the MFSL Vinyl has bettered every other incarnation I've ever heard. Nonsense, read above. Agreed you should discover yourself.
I have judged for myself. Most people are brainwashed by Apple not the Steve Hoffman forums... I agree with your first line I am asking questions if you knew me in real life you would know i always do that
Depends on the album. Help and Rubber Soul have rejected 1987 masterings of the original mixes (pressed only in Canada) which are excellent. The 1987 CD's rule for the rest of the albums. The first four are a more complicated issue. There are any number of vinyl pressings that one might prefer, that blow away the 2009 remasters. If we are talking about the mono albums, the 2009 versions are decent, but again there are great vinyl pressings that aren't as "manipulated".
