And George Harrison in Anthology: "When they invented stereo, I thought 'What do you want two speakers for?' Because it ruined the sound from our point of view. When everything came out of two speakers, it sounded very naked"
The stereo mix is pretty much the best that Martin and Emerick could come up with with the limited track selection that they had. If you put any competent mixing engineer in George Martin's shoes at the mixing table when they were making the stereo mix, I doubt any of them could have done a better job than they did. Sure, they missed a couple of effects, but otherwise I fail to see what else they could have done to improve it.
Yet Lewisohn notes in Tune In that George was disappointed with My Bonnie when he first heard the mono single, having previously heard the stereo playback in the studio (which he thought was much better). This info was taken from a letter George wrote to a fan.
Yeah, for example: Let's take a look at the final 4 Track of Getting Better: Track 1: Pianet Electric Piano, Drums, John's Guitar, Tamboura Track 2: Doubled Bass and Drums Track 3: Doubled Vocal and Harmonies Track 4: Guitar, Conga's, Handclaps, Piano Who's gonna look at that and say: This isn't gonna be a mess...
Oh now you've done it! It's John who is supposed to change his mind, say something different every time, not George! George is supposed to be the one who hates The Beatles and loves money. What next, Paul being grumpy or Ringo being praised for his musical ability?? ***For the benefit of some forum members, what you have just read is ironic sarcasm pointed at others, not the quoted poster, who understands what I'm saying.
No no. I can learn from anyone. Even from a music lover such as yourself. I thought you might have meant the way it was panned. Cool. Agree 100%.
Ok. Listen guys...... Who ever gave me the info about MEGA...THANK YOU. It actually worked! So now I can share with you my unreleased horrible mixes. JOY!!
I think that's only true if the stereo panning/separation is taken to an extreme....which unfortunately was the case with a lot of 60's stereo mixes. The producers were trying too hard to show off the wonders of this new technology, but overdid it, and severely weakened the music. This is why I do my own versions. They're not mono (which I find flat and a bit lifeless), but they're not extreme stereo. The bulk of the music is in or near the center, but with enough separation to give that stereo magic.
I know it's not everyone's cup of tea, but I far prefer it to both the mono version and the de-panned 87 mix. Maybe there's a bit of nostalgia there - it was the version I remember listening to when I first discovered the band. Just love the clarity of the vocals throughout. Will be my go-to version until they put out a ground-up remix.
I just feel like the middle is missing on it. Maybe it's because I'm almost always listening to music on headphones...but I feel like half the music is over there < and the other half is over there > and there's this whole in the middle. I may be a simpleton, but I feel like lead vocals, drums and bass should almost always be centered, or close to the center, in a stereo mix.
Agree 1000% (that's a lot of percent ). I don't care what engineers do with any of the other stuff if the lead vocals, drums and bass are centered in a stereo mix. .
Mr Lennonist, I’ve been saying this for months. Yet, many forum members think it’s nuts. To me it makes sense to mix the songs this way. Giles and Sam had the opportunity to do it with Pepper, Abbey Road and The White Album. They mucked it up IMO.
Here's the German MONO "A Hard Day's Night"... 1964: The Beatles - Yeah! Yeah! Yeah! (A Hard Day's Night - Originals From The United Artists' Picture)
LOL In the case of Abbey Road it would have been nice if Giles at kept the drums in ONE DAMN PLACE during a song instead of some fake drums that move all over. With "Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds" Giles Martin really made the harpsichord sound like a stereo one. Very clever. And then it went to his head! Problem was the tom spread wasn't apparent enough. Boost up the upper bass EQ on the toms and pan them fast 3 to 9 0' clock. And then back again. All automated of course. The problem wasn't the fake drums. The problems was that he didn't execute it properly. It sounded like a half assed attempt. I barely knew it was there. On Sgt. Pepper it worked. But not on Abbey Road. Maybe some digital slap back echo panned half way left on the drum track might have been o.k. or perhaps no fake stereo drums at all. The harpsichord had notes that were slow and nicley spaces apart. Perfect for what he did..But trying to make a stereo drum kit. Give it a rest Giles? They are other ways to take a mono keyboard and make it bigger or stereo like. The piano on the Styx song, 'Babe' is a very simple effect. Digital reverb units had just come in back in 1978. One setting was called a stereo panner. It moved the instrument/ vocal back and forth across the stereo soundstage at whatever speed you wanted. You could also add to that a delay or reverb as well. Anyway the "Babe" piano effect is just a digital reverb unit with the stereo panner on maximum. Although it is too fast for you to hear the piano in "Babe" is actually moving left to right and then right to left ad infinitum at very high speeds. Anyone can create this effect. All you need is a keyboard, a mixer with 1 effect send, and any digital reverb with a the stereo panner set to maximum. So here is a FAKE STEREO PIANO on a famous record. I wonder if any of you knew?. Well sort of...... It is modern practice to pan: kick (not the whole dum kit!), bass and vocal in the center. The only reason bass and kick were panned that way was because of the problems with cutting a stereo record. It had nothing to do with sounding better. I want to make this clear. We got used to hearing it that way so that any other panning choice felt unnatural. But there is no law of music or acoustics that says bass and kick will come from the center. When remixing classic old tunes, especially 1957 - 1966 you can't mix them like a modern mix. Example: TRK 1: Whole band TRK 2: Orchestra TRK 3: vocal / back ground vocals This is an example of an actual 3 track I had to remix a few years back. The bass and drums are in track 1 and vocal are in Track 3 so we should pan those all in the middle and the orchestra can go right or left. Not good right? Well these days we can separate the bass out. But it will still sound wierd. I believe you are referring to "A little Help From My Friends" where he did not pan Ringo's voice in the middle but instead used the same panning as the 1967 mix. Giles explained why he did this. And I agreed. That song had a certain character to it. When Giles panned Ringo's voice in the middle along with the bass the whole feeling of the song changed. Threw it off completely. Just like the bass in "Something" had to remain far right. But it wasn't loud enough. I was hoping for a different mix. Instead he panned everthing the same way. And made unconvincing fake drums. And let some mastering engineering pour tons of compression and super bright EQ over the CD release. You don't always pan instruments where some rule says they should go. That is bullshat 21st century mixing. But to a lot of people putting bass, kick and snare anywhere else but the center dies sound mighty wierd. I agree with panning drums, bass and vocals in the middle. But when they are sometimes only 3-5 tracks you run out of races to put them. I just hope that when Giles remixes Rubber Soul in 2025 (50 th anniversary) that we get an authentic 60's LEFT - VOCAL CENTER - RIGHT mix and not some rainbow mix. Except for Michell all the tracks for Rubber Soul only have 4 tracks. 5 because they can separate the bass. Only Michelle will have 7 tracks. Just my Canadian nickel....
Hey, I am wrong all the time. Good. I guess always thought of that album as a 1963 album because it was recorded in 1963. Anything from Germany in mono after that? Maybe by another band or artist?
kick and snare in center. but yeah, you can place the other drum sounds to the right and left. definitely more fun that way. like at 2:09 here: but not ALL the way to the right and the left.
"A Hard Day's Night" recorded in 1963? I think not. Recorded 29 January – 2 June 1964 Released 10 July 1964 .
Hey, I got a wierd early 70's mix for you. The song is, DON'T PULL YOUR LOVE. The kick is in the middle but the snare is at 10 'clock. So when ever there is a fill it goes from left to right. In this case the drums are panned the way the kit is a set up. There is great piano work at the end of that song. I have had the privilege of hearing that piano in solo by itself. The piano track should have been turned up near the end. Another 5.1 mix that never happened over red tape. It is very rare to hear a snare panned anywhere but center. I have a Jamaican Reggae record from 1975 where one song has the high hat half way left, the snare halfway right and the kick in the center. But many Jackson 5 and Osmond songs from the 1969 to 1972 period have mono drums panned to either the hard left or right side. Although for I WANT YOU BACK it doesn't help the song. Half way left or right but not all the way to one side. That just weakens the rhythm section. Check out the live version of MAGIC POWER from Triumph's 80's live CD. The tom panning mix is the widest I have ever heard. When the drummer does a fill it goes hard left right across the sound stage to hard right. It makes the drums sound freskin' huge.
