Log In
Register
1.58am
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline
trcanberra said
A couple of further thoughts:
- I’m undwerhelmed as well as suggested in my earlier post. It seems to me that a lot of the differences are only of interest to those folks who want to hear 28 takes of a song – and get excited when one version of the 3rd chorus has an “ooh” instead of an “ahh” on the third line. Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad these things are available for those who appreciate them.
Possibly. Certainly sums me up.
The Void said
@meanmistermustard Would you agree that there are only a handful of songs where the difference is particularly striking though? The examples you give (such as Sexy Sadie missing a few tambourine taps) are quite/extremely subtle, although I noticed the Matchbox vocals seeming dodgier than usual!
Yes. That’s what I meant by
meanmistermustard said
Its not quite accurate to say “As far as differences, there are only a handful songs.”; there are numerous differences between tracks in mono or stereo its just that few are as significant as ‘Helter Skelter ‘ or ‘Don’t Pass Me By ‘.
and why the examples were as given. A few missing taps on a tambourine will get most listeners/reader shutting their eyes whilst saying “Who cares?”.
The following people thank meanmistermustard for this post:
trcanberra, Beatlebug, Bongo"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
2.52pm
16 March 2016
Offline @meanmistermustard Yeah, it looks like I missed the bit in your post where you already answered my question, sorry about that…
The following people thank The Void for this post:
meanmistermustard"You're not talking to Rikki and the Redstreaks you know!" - John Lennon
3.00pm
Reviewers
Moderators
1 May 2011
Offline The Void said
meanmistermustard Yeah, it looks like I missed the bit in your post where you already answered my question, sorry about that…
No worries. I thought I may have confused things.
"I told you everything I could about me, Told you everything I could" ('Before Believing' - Emmylou Harris)
4.47pm
5 November 2011
Offline meanmistermustard said
meanmistermustard said
Its not quite accurate to say “As far as differences, there are only a handful songs.”; there are numerous differences between tracks in mono or stereo its just that few are as significant as ‘Helter Skelter ‘ or ‘Don’t Pass Me By ‘.and why the examples were as given. A few missing taps on a tambourine will get most listeners/reader shutting their eyes whilst saying “Who cares?”.
I miss the handclaps in the mono version of Ob-La-Di Ob-La-Da
The following people thank Little Piggy Dragonguy for this post:
Bongo, OudisAll living things must abide by the laws of the shape they inhabit
1.44pm
28 March 2014
Offline Little Piggy Dragonfly said
I miss the handclaps in the mono version of Ob-La-Di Ob-La-Da
In Back In The USSR , it’s weird how the jet taking off/landing is different in the mono vs stereo.
Here we go……
BEATLES Music gives me Eargasms! 
3.24pm
Reviewers
29 August 2013
Offline I’m always tempted to say Y Not – but I won’t 😉
(It’s a bad Ringo joke for those not in the know)
The following people thank trcanberra for this post:
Necko, Beatlebug, BeatleSnut==> trcanberra and hongkonglady - Together even when not (married for those not in the know!) <==
5.54pm
28 March 2014
Offline The Void said
I have finally got my hands on the 2009 Mono CD remasters – I can’t say that they’ve made that much of an impression. Call me cloth ears
I decided to give my mono’s a solid listen since this thread @The Void started , and like @meanmistermustard mentioned Rubber Soul (in Stereo) is a little annoying since the vocals are on 1 side for some songs then change over to the other side. You do not get that annoyance with the mono’s. Same with the earlier stereo LPs with vocals on one side. 
(With the headphones test) I’ve come to the conclusion, that yes the earlier LPs do sound very good in mono, but going back to stereo didn’t seem to bother me too much. I found if I wasn’t trying too hard to listen to the vocals on one side, but just listen overall, I still preferred the stereo separation over the mono.
Test Conclusion: Stereo rules and I’m pretty sure that’s why Apple/Spotify also chose stereo! 
**** Now because of this thread, I now have to do the comparisons of the 1965 Help ! & Rubber Soul 
(remastered stereo versions) from the “2009 mono box set” vs the “2009 stereo box set” versions 
. I blame the above 2 members for this!!!!! 
BEATLES Music gives me Eargasms!
4.59am
28 February 2016
Offline What’s the difference between the 2009 mono remaster and the 2014 mono remaster?
7.18am
16 March 2016
Offline **** Now because of this thread, I now have to do the comparisons of the 1965 Help ! & Rubber Soul
(remastered stereo versions) from the “2009 mono box set” vs the “2009 stereo box set” versions
Sorry! (Not really sorry :-P) I tend to agree that generally speaking the 2009 Stereos are pretty damn impressive and though the monos are an interesting change I’m not a convert.
@Bullion I believe the difference is that for the 2014 remasters they went straight back to the analogue master tapes and didn’t use any digital jiggery pokery. It was reading about this that piqued my interest in the whole mono business in the first place, but as I don’t own a record player – and frankly that’s unlikely to change – I figured the 2009 Monos were the best option to experiment with. There’s quite a few online articles about the 2014 process – this Mojo one is the most concise http://www.mojo4music.com/1556…..r-in-mono/ 🙂
The following people thank The Void for this post:
Bullion, trcanberra"You're not talking to Rikki and the Redstreaks you know!" - John Lennon
6.09pm
28 March 2014
Offline Don.W said
What’s the difference between the 2009 mono remaster and the 2014 mono remaster?
The 2009 CDs were digital mixes, as were the 2012 stereo LPs, but like @The Void mentioned, they went back to the original analog master tapes to make the new 2014 mono LPs.
Not to be mistaken with the 2014 US CD box set which was basically the 2009 CDs made to sound somewhat like the original US Capitol LPs. Really all they did was give you the US mini album covers with the UK mixes.
The Void said I tend to agree that generally speaking the 2009 Stereos are pretty damn impressive and though the monos are an interesting change I’m not a convert.
Exactly how I feel. It was nice going back and giving the mono’s a good listening to again, but it’s back to stereo for me!
The following people thank Bongo for this post:
trcanberra, The Void, Bullion BEATLES Music gives me Eargasms!
7.22pm
28 March 2014
Offline One song that I feel sounds much better in mono is Can’t Buy Me Love. When the drumming starts at the 0:09 mark, they are much more driven compared to the stereo version, where you hardly hear the cymbals & drums driving the song. Weird since you’d think it would sound even better with the drums being separated from the mono sound.
Now I’m not going to sleep tonight……
The following people thank Bongo for this post:
The Void BEATLES Music gives me Eargasms!
11.45am
12 June 2014
Offline I listen to both, for different reasons-
the mono versions for the most part seem more powerful, full rush assault of sound,
pretty much the way the Beatles wanted to record them.
If I’m listening to individual instrument parts (sometimes vocal), sometimes the stereo versions
given me better differentiation. (wow, listen to Yellow Submarine Song Tracks for the optimal mix)
That being said, the mono track ordering drives me NUTS, with the British order replacing what I had
listened to for 100 years! Norwegian Wood HAS to follow I’ve Just Seen A Face ! I’ve even re-dubbed
a set of my own CDs with the songs in the ‘proper’ order.
oldFartBassPlayer Walt
6.30pm
15 May 2014
Offline Personally, yes, I agree with @trcanberra, the “voice on the left, band on the right” sound of early stereo versions bothers me. But the point is that, at least for me, most of the original mono versions (with a few exceptions, like Paperback Writer and Rain ), provide an astounding sound. George Martin was a genius indeed. Having said that, if you want to analyze, to study The Beatles’ arrangements or Martin’s recording process, a stereo version gives you a lot. That implies, of course, not listening to the songs just for pure enjoyment, but a more detached approach.
The following people thank Oudis for this post:
Beatlebug, trcanberra“Forsan et haec olim meminisse juvabit” (“Perhaps one day it will be a pleasure to look back on even this”; Virgil, The Aeneid, Book 1, line 203, where Aeneas says this to his men after the shipwreck that put them on the shores of Africa)
8.38pm
Moderators
15 February 2015
Offline
Oudis typed with his fingers
That implies, of course, not listening to the songs just for pure enjoyment, but a more detached approach.
Being a musician and general music nut, I’ve always blended the two approaches for maximum awesomeness-appreciation. 
([{BRACKETS!}])
New to Forumpool? You can introduce yourself here.
If you love The Beatles Bible, and you have adblock, don't forget to white-list this site! 
9.43pm
15 May 2014
Offline Well, I envy you @Beatlebug… Most of the time I listen to music searching for catharsis; even now, at my venerable age, it does that for me. But when I do, I’m totally lost in the song I’m listening to. Only when I detach myself can I analyze –the rational part of my psyche takes control, not my emotions. I haven’t been able to fuse them both in one single experience. I’m not capable of it.
“Forsan et haec olim meminisse juvabit” (“Perhaps one day it will be a pleasure to look back on even this”; Virgil, The Aeneid, Book 1, line 203, where Aeneas says this to his men after the shipwreck that put them on the shores of Africa)
7.29am
Moderators
15 February 2015
Offline What I meant was, I get my enjoyment of the music out of diggin’ every guitar lick and neat harmony bit and the great strings in the back. So I can’t really escape the analysing– curse of the musician, you know.
The following people thank Beatlebug for this post:
Oudis, ewe2([{BRACKETS!}])
New to Forumpool? You can introduce yourself here.
If you love The Beatles Bible, and you have adblock, don't forget to white-list this site!
9.31am
23 July 2016
Offline I personally can’t tell the difference, although the mono UK releases are better because that’s what The Beatles intended, although I grew up on the US stereo releases.
Maybe you should try posting more.
5.03pm
Reviewers
29 August 2013
Offline Oudis said
Personally, yes, I agree with trcanberra, the “voice on the left, band on the right” sound of early stereo versions bother me. But the point is that, at least for me, most of the original mono versions (with a few exceptions, like Paperback Writer and Rain ), provide an astounding sound. George Martin was a genius indeed. Having said that, if you want to analyze, to study The Beatles’ arrangements or Martin’s recording process, a stereo version gives you a lot. That implies, of course, not listening to the songs just for pure enjoyment, but a more detached approach.
I imagine they must bother a lot of people. HKL and I have been listening to a number of the songs together recently (joy oh joy) – and her first reaction to hearing the songs on my stereo was that she thought there was something wrong with the speakers. She knew most of the music but had not heard it on a hi-fi system before with the ‘odd’ stereo mastering.
The following people thank trcanberra for this post:
Beatlebug, Ahhh Girl, Oudis, ewe2==> trcanberra and hongkonglady - Together even when not (married for those not in the know!) <==
12.54am
27 March 2015
Offline
I have enjoyed some of the mono versions, but I have to say the new remixes are great. I’ve noticed the bass is often high up in the mix now, whereas it was barely noticeable in the mono versions. Didn’t Paul once explain the rapid evolvement of his style when they began using stereo that, now that people could actually hear it, he wanted to make more of an effort? I can definitely see where he was coming from with that even though his early work has some fantastic bass lines and riffs as well. Heck even on the tony Sheridan records you wouldn’t think a novice was playing.
Anyway, it’s not just the bass. I like how some long lost guitar parts, or hidden drums, or even vocals are more pronounced in the remasters. So whilst I’ll always have an appreciation for the mono mixes, I think I might choose stereo in most cases.
Edit: I nearly always use head phones and yes, the separated instruments and vocals have more than once made me wonder if one of my earbuds had just given out. I don’t like having no sound in one ear, so those are kind of annoying. As is that one song on London Town which has an intro that bounces back and forth between left and right at a very fast speed. I always skip that because it literally gives me a headache. So, stereo isn’t always better.
The following people thank Mademoiselle Kitty >^..^< for this post:
Beatlebug, OudisFormerly Known As JPM-Fangirl --
2016
'Out There' - 07-06-2015 - Ziggo Dome Amsterdam -- 'One On One' - 12-06-2016 - Pinkpop Festival Landgraaf
1.07am
Reviewers
17 December 2012
Offline You should hear the 2014 analogue mono remasters, @Mademoiselle Kitty >^..^<.
They are a total revelation. They put the 2009 mono and stereo remasters to shame.
"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
1 Guest(s)