Why Giles Won’t Remix Rubber Soul/Revolver

As I said in that post, one of a few different factors - I am sure money is always a factor in everything to some extent. But I see no reason to not believe them when they specifically talk about playlist-curating factors in the streaming age, in the press for these remixes

 

If Giles won't, let someone else have a crack at it!

 

It doesn't necessarily mean "conform to centered drums" is the only aspect of modernizing (I was just listening to a 2020 rock album with drums and bass panned not strictly center), just the overall sound and what they did with the mix overall. I think that they definitely have an overall clarity, punchiness, etc. that makes it sound a bit more "modern" of a mix to my ears personally - which makes me see their point of view having such a sound side-by-side with other songs in playlists

 

Last time I checked, there wasn’t a single Beatles remix that made them sound like a fresh new band or a modern recording. The remixes don’t make them sound like a different band. It’s a load of crap to say these remixes are akin to the Mona Lisa comparison above. Each remix was clearly done in respect to the character of the originals. It’s not like these are now extended dance remixes.

 

Speaking as a younger fan, the production values of the old Beatles records put me off for years. I had the Red / Blue compilation sets, and the sound quality just prevented me from connecting with the music for the longest time. It was the 2006 Love set that actually let me enjoy the songs on their musical merits for the 1st time. I eventually grew to love the Beatles music / production / history, but the concern of "old sound = disconnect with a new generation" is a legitimate concern.

Plus, we now have streaming platforms, Dolby Atmos, 5.1 sound systems, digital demixing technologies, etc. There's plenty of devices and listeners who would benefit from well-done Beatles remixes. I know a few people who got into Pepper from the 2017 remix, and I personally didn't enjoy Pepper until hearing the mono mixes for the 1st time. Preserving the historical mixes is critical, but providing new listening experiences can help draw in new audiences to keep the music alive.

 

First I’ve heard of that, thought the 2009 Mono CDs and 1965 stereo mixes of Rubber Soul and Help! were universally praised. Not like the 2009 stereo remasters which had compression/limiting complaints.

 

Both. Mr. Martin has said that one of his goals with the remixes is to improve the drastic difference between modern recordings and Beatles recordings, so that they sound more natural being placed alongside each other.

And what’s your evidence that this is exactly what they would do? How do you know they wouldn’t do exactly what they did with the 2009 remasters, just with more strange EQ choices you’d disagree with?

Well, if you’re against remixing, then clearly you think that those must be the definitive mixes, because you think those should be the *only* mixes. Outside of rubber soul and revolver, all of the 2009 remasters are the original stereo mixes.
I don’t believe any other full album was remixed before 2017

 

If Apple remastered the original stereo mixes with as much care and respect to the sound quality as they did for the mono LP remasters and then released them on CD/hi-res, they would sell a TON. I'd be first in line. Imagine all the people here who spend $125 on a SINGLE audiophile LP (MoFi One Step). There is absolutely money to be made from original Beatles mixes in 2022, especially if done properly.

 

First time I heard taxman, I loved the song, hated the way it sounded in my headphones, wouldn’t listen to it happily again until I found the mono, and even then I’d still like it in stereo just… in better stereo.
Put the track in the center, and the vocals to the left and right if possible.
My right ear likes the Beatles too

 

My thoughts:

The originals aren't, and never will be, going away. When you go on Apple Music and look up Abbey Road, it gives you two results. One is for the new remix (because it is new, duh) and the second result is the original mix. This is just standard algorithmic recommendation, the release year is newer so it shows up first.

Let's keep in mind the basic facts here. Apple, owners of The Beatles' music, want money in order to keep staying around. How do you make more money? New content. The Beatles dont have any new content anymore (sadly) so one of the only few things to do is to update the sound of existing content. Once they've finished doing that? Find a new way to update the sound! That's why we're getting Atmos mixes of songs now, it's a new way to hear familiar music.

These releases are targeted towards the youth of today, while still having appeal to the older audiences.

Also, in regards to comparisons to classical artworks, and what defines true artist intent... that varies from person to person. One band might put out an album, and not care what happens to it as long as people get to hear it sometime. Another band might prefer the originals to be heard first, but also be open to remixes if it sounds good.

I hope we do get a Revolver remix sometime. Not because the original isn't worth hearing, but because it would be cool to hear in a different way than you've heard for the past 56 years.

 

Agreed - those Floyd sets were masterfully done. People might've preferred earlier masterings / vinyl pressings for various titles, but it's hard to argue that they could've done much better given the state of those tapes. No limiting, high resolution, lack of noise reduction - all top notch stuff!

A simple of set of the original mono albums, original stereo albums, and Past Masters / Mono Masters would be fine and dandy. Maybe include the 1987 mixes of Rubber Soul / Help (for completion's sake) and add Free as a Bird / Real Love to Past Masters, and call it a day. That should be fairly straightforward, no?

 

Yes, Pepper mono mix is great. Seems like you do appreciate the care that went into the mono mixes, and it does kind of explain to some extent why you don't like Red and Blue sets which use the stereo mixes but to me the 2017 Pepper remix is just ill. One of the worst remixes of a classic album I've ever heard.

 

The only thing the 2009 mono set didn't have that the 2009 stereo set had was limiting. It otherwise had all of the same issues.

He said that about Abbey Road?

Evidence that is what they would do? Well, they didn't do that for the mono LP box, nor the mono mixes included in the Pepper and White Album boxes, so there's certainly reason to believe a future remastering approach could/would be different.

The question was regarding mastering, not mixes.

First time I heard Taxman, I thought it sounded great. Loved the way it sounded in my headphones. Listened to it again and again in stereo.

Funny how the Anthology 2 mix has even more extreme stereo separation.

This.

Why do they need to be targeted to the youth of today? There were no remixes targeted to the youth of the 1970s, or the youth of the 1980s, or the youth of...you get the point.

 

What issues?

 

Various "fixes" throughout. Removal of various "noises" that were actually part of the performances.

Plus the EQ on the 2009 mono CD box is generally not as well regarded as that on the 2014 LP box.

 

I enjoy aspects of the 2017 remix; the floating keyboards on Lucy is an inspired choice, and having She's Leaving Home at the faster speed in full stereo is greatly appreciated. The main problem is the sound quality / tonality of the mix - it sounds really brash.

Compared the Love remix of Mr. Kite to the 2017 mix. The Love mix is nicely balanced, warm, and pleasant to listen to. Meanwhile, the 2017 has a certain harshness that feels rather unpleasant. I'd probably take the 2017 remix over the 1967 stereo mix (which just sounds flat and lifeless to me), but the fact that a 2017 remix from flawlessly preserved muli-track tapes can't beat a 1967 mono mix (or the earlier 2006 mix) is just baffling to me.

A similar example can be found on the Love remix of All You Need Is Love versus the 2015 remix on 1+. Full, warm, and pleasant on the 2006 mix; harsh and clanging on the 2015 mix.

My issue isn't the idea of remixing, but the quality of the remixing. As long as the original mixes are properly archived and easily accessible, then I'm fine with listening to those. However, considering the condition of the multitrack tapes, it's sad to know that we could be hearing the Beatles' music in way better fidelity. Those old mono mixes were made with care, but they were also made for cheap record players with needles that would jump out of the groove when too much bass was present. They're historic, and important to keep, but they definitely can be improved upon with the right team at the helm.

 

I have never seen anything so universally praised on this forum as those 2014 Beatles mono LP remasters.

Conversely, I have never seen anything so universally hated as the 50th remix of Chicago Transit Authority.

 

So you understand why one wouldn’t like the stereo mixes, and your solution is… just listen to mono only?
While full well knowing why one might prefer stereo for their music?
Ridiculous.

 

Well Giles wanted the vocal centered and the only track left to pan right is the drums and bass.

 

Because the youth of today might check it out. I should know, I didn't know ANYTHING about them prior to 2017 when the Pepper remix was being promoted. Now i know way too much haha

I mean. Are we forgetting the 1980s remasters of the Beatles' catalogue that had 2 remixes smothered in digital reverb?

 

You know exactly why.
What exactly could they do with those tapes in 1976 that they couldn’t do in 1966, targeted towards people not that much older, and equipment not that much different? Nothing, not much. Even some early 70s mixes are quite bizarre.
For the 80s, two albums actually were remixed to be more narrow, and George Martin expressed issues with some of the early mixes.
Now, a good reason for doing a remix for today’s generation is because it’s actually possible to make changes. There’s not as many restrictions as there was back in the 60s, 70s, 80s, 90s, even the 2000s. The strange issues that some have with the stereo mix can be resolved, and we have plug-ins today that can very very accurately replicate equipment used back in the 60s for mixing and mastering, stuff that most certainly didn’t exist 10, 20, 30 years ago
Not to mention, technologies are evolving, Dolby Atmos is becoming a thing supported by more and more headphones, speakers, home theaters and services.

 

Two remixes out of...how many albums? And reverb or not, how much do those sound like anything else from 1987?

So, remixes *aren't* actually necessary, it's just that now you can do all kinds of wacky stuff? I don't know, that doesn't sound like a great argument to me.

 

Not to mention, you have multiple people in the Beatles' production camp who were dissatisfied with the stereo mixes. John Lennon claimed that "you haven't really heard Pepper until you've heard it in mono"; George Martin remixed various songs for the Rock and Roll compilations in the mid 70s and didn't even want the 1st two albums issued in stereo on CD.

There's technical advantages to remixes, there's historical reasons for remixes, and there's simply the fun of having remixes.

Just be sure to keep the original mixes in print. Don't pull a George Lucas Special Edition on us...

 

To be clear, George Martin didn't remix anything for Rock and Roll Music. All he did was some filtering of the twin-track material.

I'd find the remixes a lot more fun if they were actually better.

 

I thought most people really liked the rhythm foundation all squeezed into one channel. Drums especially. I really like that phasy, trippy swirling back and forth between channels, especially on a mono "electronically reprocessed for stereo" track. Really a modern feel compared to that simplistic bass-bias one, treble-bias the other channel technique. The gold standard is Capitol Duophonic. Man those guys knew what they were doing. It's like those 3D movie theatre glasses but with audio.