Log In
Register
12.15am
20 September 2013
Offline
Ron Nasty said
So we were trying to get as much separation between the instruments, as much clarity as possible. If we could put a bit more bass line or kick drum in and give it a bit more punch, we would do. – Steve Rooke
And that’s exactly what the mono LPs have given us, without tweaking.
9.13pm
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline
@Inner Light said
Paul and Ringo both highly approved the remasters from 2009. I understand the technical variations between CD and vinyl but that doesn’t make the vinyl sound better. This to me is like someone saying they can hear a real difference between an MP3 320kps versus a MP3 256kps. I think we are all brainwashed into thinking and believing that what these engineers say is the gospel truth. Don’t forget, they get paid and once again, it’s all about the money and sales.
I’m sorry, Inner Light. I know I’ve already picked you up on your description of the 2009 remastering process. I’ve been thinking about this statement though. To say that “Paul and Ringo both highly approved the remasters from 2009” (as did Yoko and Olivia) is a ridiculous defence of the 2009 remasters. If they were privately thought they could have been done better, and that a mistake had been made going down the road of not doing an analog remaster that was then digitised, was there any chance of them saying that publicly? Of course not!
Imagine it, the 2009 remasters are released, and Paul is asked for his opinion. “They’re okay,” he shrugs. “We’re wondering whether we shouldn’t have made the remastering process as analog as possible though. But, hey-ho! You live and learn!”
Of course Paul, Ringo, Yoko and Olivia were going to say, “They’re bloody fantastic!” They had a whole twin campaign (Rock Band occurred at the same time) set up for 09/09/09 that had been in the pipeline for years and involved more companies than just Apple.
However, we do have some indication of their private thoughts on the 2009 remasters, especially the mono ones. The vinyl boxes – stereo and mono – were expected at around the same time. While they allowed the stereo to go ahead in 2012 (as you say, the format they were less interested in for the majority of their career), they insisted on a full analog remaster for the mono, and closer reproductions of the original packaging, holding it back a further two years.
If they “highly approved” of the 2009 mono remasters, why go to all the expense of commissioning a new wholly analogue remaster? That was nothing to do with engineers, but Paul, Ringo, Yoko and Olivia, and involved them paying twice for the mono remasters without any real expectation of a greater financial return on the mono vinyl. Though the stereo includes two extra discs, and is currently (on UK Amazon) £14 cheaper (£273.99 vs £288.00). Given the cost of a second remaster, and the more involved packaging, financially they will probably earn more from the stereo than the mono.
"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
9.09pm
20 December 2010
Offline Ron Nasty said
@Inner Light said
Paul and Ringo both highly approved the remasters from 2009. I understand the technical variations between CD and vinyl but that doesn’t make the vinyl sound better. This to me is like someone saying they can hear a real difference between an MP3 320kps versus a MP3 256kps. I think we are all brainwashed into thinking and believing that what these engineers say is the gospel truth. Don’t forget, they get paid and once again, it’s all about the money and sales.I’m sorry, Inner Light. I know I’ve already picked you up on your description of the 2009 remastering process. I’ve been thinking about this statement though. To say that “Paul and Ringo both highly approved the remasters from 2009” (as did Yoko and Olivia) is a ridiculous defence of the 2009 remasters. If they were privately thought they could have been done better, and that a mistake had been made going down the road of not doing an analog remaster that was then digitised, was there any chance of them saying that publicly? Of course not!
Imagine it, the 2009 remasters are released, and Paul is asked for his opinion. “They’re okay,” he shrugs. “We’re wondering whether we shouldn’t have made the remastering process as analog as possible though. But, hey-ho! You live and learn!”
Of course Paul, Ringo, Yoko and Olivia were going to say, “They’re bloody fantastic!” They had a whole twin campaign (Rock Band occurred at the same time) set up for 09/09/09 that had been in the pipeline for years and involved more companies than just Apple.
However, we do have some indication of their private thoughts on the 2009 remasters, especially the mono ones. The vinyl boxes – stereo and mono – were expected at around the same time. While they allowed the stereo to go ahead in 2012 (as you say, the format they were less interested in for the majority of their career), they insisted on a full analog remaster for the mono, and closer reproductions of the original packaging, holding it back a further two years.
If they “highly approved” of the 2009 mono remasters, why go to all the expense of commissioning a new wholly analogue remaster? That was nothing to do with engineers, but Paul, Ringo, Yoko and Olivia, and involved them paying twice for the mono remasters without any real expectation of a greater financial return on the mono vinyl. Though the stereo includes two extra discs, and is currently (on UK Amazon) £14 cheaper (£273.99 vs £288.00). Given the cost of a second remaster, and the more involved packaging, financially they will probably earn more from the stereo than the mono.
I found a site where I can download the mono vinyl boxset. They said they uploaded from turntable to site. If I do this, will it retain the sound quality and still sound better then the 2009 mono CD release? They did the transfer at 640 birate. I know some of the fans who have purchased the box set uploaded to CD and put the LP’s away as to not wear out the records.
The further one travels, the less one knows
9.51pm
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline @Inner Light As I’ve said previously, I have a needledrop of the mono. It was done very professionally. I have a friend who is in a band, and is good friend’s with a guy who owns a recording studio. His friend bought the mono box, and its virgin play was done in the studio, with him making a digital copy using the studio desk. As you know, I believe this mono mix is an improvement on the 2009. Another person here who got a copy of my needledrop commented elsewhere on the forum that they thought they sounded “incredible”. I can only talk for the needledrop I have though.
"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
10.19pm
20 December 2010
Offline Ron Nasty said
@Inner Light As I’ve said previously, I have a needledrop of the mono. It was done very professionally. I have a friend who is in a band, and is good friend’s with a guy who owns a recording studio. His friend bought the mono box, and its virgin play was done in the studio, with him making a digital copy using the studio desk. As you know, I believe this mono mix is an improvement on the 2009. Another person here who got a copy of my needledrop commented elsewhere on the forum that they thought they sounded “incredible”. I can only talk for the needledrop I have though.
Thanks for the help
The further one travels, the less one knows
11.45pm
20 September 2013
Offline I’ve played my LP’s once – recorded them as 24 bit/96k Flac files and burnt DVD-Audio discs (my CD player plays DVD-Audio), can’t tell the difference from the LP’s.
Also converted to Apple Lossless for my iPod/phone.
I think we’re so lucky to have this set, and to be able to preserve the albums like this is brilliant.
O.B.P.
8.39pm
27 October 2013
Offline Not sure if this was linked here or not, but there is some great detail in these interview questions, directed to Steve Berkowitz and Sean Magee.
The following people thank fishcane for this post:
Joe5.05pm
31 March 2008
Offline
Thanks fishcane. That was interesting. I was surprised to see Sean Magee talking about “vinyls” though (as every record collector should know, the plural of vinyl is vinyl).
The following people thank Joe for this post:
fishcaneCan buy me love! Please consider supporting the Beatles Bible on Amazon
Or buy my paperback/ebook! Riding So High – The Beatles and Drugs
Don't miss The Bowie Bible – now live!
6.06pm
4 September 2009
Offline Oyster Black Pearl said
I’ve played my LP’s once – recorded them as 24 bit/96k Flac files and burnt DVD-Audio discs (my CD player plays DVD-Audio), can’t tell the difference from the LP’s.Also converted to Apple Lossless for my iPod/phone.
I think we’re so lucky to have this set, and to be able to preserve the albums like this is brilliant.
O.B.P.
OBP – Which programs did you use for recording and burning? I would love to do this also.
I can record with Audacity via the line-in, which I have done with my Bob Dylan mono. They seemed to have turned out well. The recording level can seem to be a bit ambiguous depending on the LP. I can play DVD-A in my car and on my DVD players, so that would be nice to be able to burn DVD-A.
After recording, did you make it a single channel mono or keep it as the 2-channel mono?
Thanks
Look Up The Number
3.31pm
20 September 2013
Offline Sorry, not checked in for a while, you’ve probably sorted it all out, but here you go. I used Audacity on my Mac, then a program called “Burn” to create DVD-Audio discs. I think there is a Windows version of Burn?
Also, DVD players should play uncompressed WAV files, so you should not need to create DVD-Audio discs (I forgot about this while doing mine!).
I have a mono switch on my amp so didn’t need to worry about 2-channel mono etc. Recording as 2-channel is handy though, as you can replace a click on one channel with copy and paste.
11.30pm
28 March 2014
Offline 
meanmistermustard said
Weren’t the 2009 stereo remasters the way we were meant to hear them; i recall an article telling us that it felt like we were in the same room as The Beatles when John was singing ‘Happiness Is A Warm Gun ‘. Now those stereo mixes are implied as being s**t because it was digital not analogue and the mono vinyl is the way we were meant to hear them. Going on that basis every new release will be the way we were meant to hear them* until its got to the point where we can get teleported back in time to actually be in the studio as the songs are being recorded.Anyone else losing the will to give a toss?
*repeated with the intention to annoy as much as these new formats are getting to annoy me.
I couldn’t agree more mmm. We all damn well know, the next batch of Beatles releases will be “analog” Stereo LPs and will be touted as the best so far!
Imagine how much better that analog stereo LP will sound, than the digital stereo LP of 2012. Soooooo yesterday!
*** What they should be doing is including all the Singles & EP’s in the same box as the LPs to eliminate the Past Masters ! This would also include the bonus “A Collection Of Oldies But Goldies” in the set, so that you get Bad Boy to complete the whole Beatles collection!
BEATLES Music gives me Eargasms!
1.55am
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline I think we are about to be told yet again that the best way to hear the Beatles is finally here with the forthcoming release of the catalogue thru Neil Young’s Pono service. Probably including the fact that we are now not just in the studio but in the actual mixing desk used during the recording sessions.
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
2.35am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline @Bongo said
What they should be doing is including all the Singles & EP’s in the same box as the LPs to eliminate the Past Masters! This would also include the bonus “A Collection Of Oldies But Goldies” in the set, so that you get Bad Boy to complete the whole Beatles collection!
Even with the inclusion of A Collection of Beatles Oldies But Goldies it still wouldn’t be complete, Bongo. The “World Wildlife Fund” version of Across The Universe was only released on the various artists charity compilation album No One’s Gonna Change Our World, while Sie Liebt Dich and Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand were never issued in the UK during the ’60s. All three tracks saw their first inclusion on a UK Beatles album (and in the case of the latter two, their first UK release) on the 1978 compilation The Beatles “Rarities” (not to be confused with the 1980 US Rarities album), first included in The Beatles Collection box set, and then issued separately in 1979.
The Beatles “Rarities” could be seen as the forerunner of Past Masters , as every track on it would reappear on Past Masters .
The following people thank Ron Nasty for this post:
Bongo"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
To @ Ron Nasty it's @ mja6758
The Beatles Bible 2020 non-Canon Poll Part One: 1958-1963 and Part Two: 1964-August 1966
2.41am
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline I dont see the point in removing ‘Past Masters ‘ which has everything you need to then include ‘Oldies But Goldies’ for one song as Apple don’t do free so they will charge you for it. And you’re getting 15 tracks you already have. And we all know they would charge more if the individual EP’s and singles were included instead.
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
10.20pm
28 March 2014
Offline Ron Nasty said
@Bongo said
What they should be doing is including all the Singles & EP’s in the same box as the LPs to eliminate the Past Masters! This would also include the bonus “A Collection Of Oldies But Goldies” in the set, so that you get Bad Boy to complete the whole Beatles collection!Even with the inclusion of A Collection of Beatles Oldies But Goldies it still wouldn’t be complete, Bongo. The “World Wildlife Fund” version of Across The Universe was only released on the various artists charity compilation album No One’s Gonna Change Our World, while Sie Liebt Dich and Komm, Gib Mir Deine Hand were never issued in the UK during the ’60s. All three tracks saw their first inclusion on a UK Beatles album (and in the case of the latter two, their first UK release) on the 1978 compilation The Beatles “Rarities” (not to be confused with the 1980 US Rarities album), first included in The Beatles Collection box set, and then issued separately in 1979.
The Beatles “Rarities” could be seen as the forerunner of Past Masters , as every track on it would reappear on Past Masters .
That’s a good point Ron. I was not aware some of these were not released as singles in the UK
BEATLES Music gives me Eargasms!
9.33pm
5 February 2010
Offline Question: if you didn’t have any of the UK albums on vinyl, and you wanted to start piecing together a complete collection, would you buy these new remasters, or would you go looking instead (at record shows, antique shops, eBay, etc.) for the 1960s originals?
Not a bit like Cagney.
10.34pm
4 September 2009
Offline PeterWeatherby said
Question: if you didn’t have any of the UK albums on vinyl, and you wanted to start piecing together a complete collection, would you buy these new remasters, or would you go looking instead (at record shows, antique shops, eBay, etc.) for the 1960s originals?
Just my opinion, but since the new mono LPs were produced with no “digital” tweaking, these are fine and are as close as you will get to the originals without hunting down and buying the originals. But it really depends on what you are looking for. If you are a “purest”, check the record shows, etc. But originals in like new condition will probably be very hard to find and expensive when you do.
The stereo vinyl set was cleaned up digitally, so those would not be a “true” representation of the 60’s stereo LPs.
For me, the stereo and mono vinyl box sets are perfect.
The following people thank c64wood for this post:
PeterWeatherbyLook Up The Number
2.04pm
Reviewers
14 April 2010
Offline Interesting question @PeterWeatherby. If I were to start collecting UK monos on vinyl I would seek the originals – not to listen to, but to have as a showpiece collection. If my intent was to play/listen to them, I would definitely by the remasters.
The following people thank Zig for this post:
PeterWeatherbyTo the fountain of perpetual mirth, let it roll for all its worth. And all the children boogie.
3.18pm
5 February 2010
Offline Thanks for the input, @c64wood and @Zig — I can see how the deciding factor would really be whether the buyer intends to use these albums more as “look, but don’t touch” collector’s items, or as more functional items to actually listen to and enjoy hearing.
I have just two Parlophone albums in my collection, both stereo, and I’ve been wanting to add to the collection and try to get a complete set of the UK albums. It’s obnoxious not to be able to just go listen to, for example, With the Beatles on vinyl. I have to make do with a combination of Meet the Beatles and The Beatles Second Album or something like that.
Since my intention is to actually listen to these albums, it sounds like maybe I should just skip over the 1960s originals and start collecting the new vinyl remasters.
The following people thank PeterWeatherby for this post:
ZigNot a bit like Cagney.
3.58pm
28 March 2014
Offline PeterWeatherby said
Question: if you didn’t have any of the UK albums on vinyl, and you wanted to start piecing together a complete collection, would you buy these new remasters, or would you go looking instead (at record shows, antique shops, eBay, etc.) for the 1960s originals?
I completed my Original Mono Parlophone/Stereo Apple set last year and already seems like they’ve gone up in price, probably due to the resurrection of the new Mono set. I’ve always said, what people have paid for the 2012 Stereo set and now the 2014 Mono set, they could have bought a half decent Original set from the 60’s. Mine aren’t (expensive first pressings), but they are all yellow Parlophone with the flip back covers, in decent shape. I’m sooooo glad I have the Originals, even know I don’t play them much, at least I know they will only keep going up in price, while these new sets will decrease in value.
My top loading white LP (although not Mono) is No. 0123459 
Still toying with getting a white mono!
Luckily, I sold my 2012 stereo set for more than I paid for it, and that helped pay for some of the Originals. Sometimes, you can get a good deal on Ebay.
BEATLES Music gives me Eargasms!
1 Guest(s)