Beatles' CDs Sound Quality

The UK version of the newer Yellow Submarine album is very good and Let It Be (Naked) is superb. The rest are nothing special - the music is excellent, but that goes without saying. The whole Beatles catalogue needs re-releasing IMHO with quality of remastering being paramount. The four lads who shook the world deserve better than what we've had so far.

Plus why no DVD release of the film 'Help' or have I missed it.

quote:

Originally posted by ROTF:
Plus why no DVD release of the film 'Help' or have I missed it.

Out of print; I missed it myself, although you can get used ones through Amazon.com (U.S) - the MPI version and a Japanese(?) version.

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:

quote:

Originally posted by ROTF:
The UK version of the newer Yellow Submarine album is very good and Let It Be (Naked) is superb. .

To be pedantic, they are remasters or a new mix.

Mike

To be extra-persnickety, they're both remixed with different songs included/excluded; essentially different albums from the originals.

quote:

Originally posted by bhazen:

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:

quote:

Originally posted by ROTF:
The UK version of the newer Yellow Submarine album is very good and Let It Be (Naked) is superb. .

To be pedantic, they are remasters or a new mix.

Mike

To be extra-persnickety, they're both remixed with different songs included/excluded; essentially different albums from the originals.

The point remains the same though, apart from these totally refurbihsed albums, the rest are nothing to write home about (EU versions anyway).

Well, phooey*. I wish EMI/Apple/Capitol (in all their various guises, domestic & foreign) would do the big Beatles Catalog Remaster project, but I suppose as long as the present CDs continue to sell millions there's no reason for them to do so. Meanwhile the Earths' magnetic field continues to degrade the tapes of the Fabs held in the Abbey Road vault.

*Yeah, you heard me: Phooey.

I bought a copy of Sgt Pepper off Ebay a couple of years ago that has versions recorded from new/unopened MFSL and original mono LPs using some expensive Linn system.

These sound much better than any of the official releases I've heard. Quite enlightening.

The packaging looks official too but has Parlophone spelled incorrectly.

Whoever produced it though decided to miss off the runout groove which makes the end of the album sound just WRONG!!!

Jonathan

quote:

Originally posted by bhazen:
Well, phooey*. I wish EMI/Apple/Capitol (in all their various guises, domestic & foreign) would do the big Beatles Catalog Remaster project, but I suppose as long as the present CDs continue to sell millions there's no reason for them to do so.

Well as they don't say here in Dublin, double phooey with mint sauce on it.

Unless EMI are a bunch of buffoons they would love the cheap job of a full remaster/remix of the beatles albums, they would still sell as they are now plus all us sado's would rebuy our Beatles collection (for possibly the third time)

No, I think it has to be The Beatles stopping this wholesale remaster and my guess is it's out of respect to George Martin. None of the Beatles are going to rubbish or denigrate his work in any way by letting someone else do a full remaster job IMHO.

I'm not entirely clear who owns exactly what rights as far as the back-catalogue is concerned. I think it would be naive to imagine that EMI would not hesitate to pochle us out of our cash yet again if they thought they could affect a suitable repackage.
As far as respect to George Martin, no doubt the job he (and Geoff Emerick) did in the sixties was fantastic. Even George, however, would acknowledge that the existing technology was comparatively primitive to what is available now. No guarantee that modern technology could improve on his work however.
BTW, my CD copy of Abbey Road sounds fine.

"BTW, my CD copy of Abbey Road sounds fine."

Yep so does mine, and my copies of Sgt. Peppers, Revolver, White Album, Rubber Soul etc.

Given the limitations of the time, what are people looking for in terms of drastic improvement?

I have plenty of other albums from this period, John Mayall, Kinks, Stones etc. Hardly any of which, sounds as good as these.

In terms of sound quality, I think the greatest hits CD, "1" sounds markedly better than the regular studio CDs. The Capitol box set of the first four albums also sounds very good to my ears. (I understand that Capitol is putting out a box set on the next four albums shortly).

Mike

quote:

Originally posted by Naimed-In-NY:
In terms of sound quality, I think the greatest hits CD, "1" sounds markedly better than the regular studio CDs. ...

Mike

As do the "Red" and "Blue" albums, credit Mike Jarratt for the mastering; "1" was Peter Mew.

BTW Mike, I was on a "Magical History Tour" (c/o Good Day Sunshine, a Beatles fanzine) to London and Liverpool a few years back (slightly cheesy concept, but *great* fun & good value nonetheless); mainly Americans on the trip; I noticed that New York people who are Beatlefans are the most fanatical & knowledgeable around. I learned a lot!

quote:

Originally posted by Steve S1:
"BTW, my CD copy of Abbey Road sounds fine."

Yep so does mine, and my copies of Sgt. Peppers, Revolver, White Album, Rubber Soul etc.

Given the limitations of the time, what are people looking for in terms of drastic improvement?

.

All I'm looking for is the original albums in both mono and stereo (preferably in the same package), with sound quality to match Let It Be Naked. The other original Beatles albums don't come close.
I am baffled as to why this hasn't been done when you consider the guaranteed sales.

quote:

Originally posted by bhazen:
I have the U.S. versions of the Beatles' albums on CD (well, I live in the U.S.); I know there are versions pressed in other countries (notably Japan) - do the Japanese Toshiba/EMI versions (or any others) sound any better than the U.S. ones? What about British or European pressings?

They are all identical. The only different CD is the original Japanese release of Abbey Road from 1983 (and deleted in 1984).

quote:

I wish EMI/Apple/Capitol (in all their various guises, domestic & foreign) would do the big Beatles Catalog Remaster project

Apparently they are. Analogue vinyl too, but I digress......

quote:

Originally posted by Martin M:

quote:

I wish EMI/Apple/Capitol (in all their various guises, domestic & foreign) would do the big Beatles Catalog Remaster project

Apparently they are. Analogue vinyl too, but I digress......

Well I hope they get a move on or we'll all be dead from old age

quote:

Originally posted by Martin M: Apparently they are. Analogue vinyl too, but I digress......

Tease! For Christmas 2006? As exclusively predicted here

duncan

quote:

Originally posted by bhazen:

quote:

Originally posted by Tarquin Maynard-Portly:

quote:

Originally posted by ROTF:
The UK version of the newer Yellow Submarine album is very good and Let It Be (Naked) is superb. .

To be pedantic, they are remasters or a new mix.

Mike

To be extra-persnickety, they're both remixed with different songs included/excluded; essentially different albums from the originals.

Just to clarify all the persnickety pedantry, the acts of remixing and remastering are two different things.

Mixing is the act of taking the multi-track work tapes and setting volume and equalization (tonal color) levels for each track in relation to the others, as well as adding effects such as reverb, echo delay, etc., and muting undesired passages or clams ... essentially, taking all the ingredients and mixing them together into a two-track stereo master (we'll leave aside the issues of 5.1 surround mixes, etc., for now). Therefore, remixing is mixing again.

Mastering is the act of taking that mixed (or remixed) two-track master and setting further volume and equalization levels for each mixed song (if needed), as well as overall volume and EQ levels for the whole master, which includes making sure the relative overall volumes of each song are balanced in relation to other songs on the album. Mastering can also include setting the song order, possibly setting alternative fades and/or edits, etc. ... essentially, taking the two-track mix and readying it for duplication in its final format. Therefore, remastering is mastering again.

As I understand it (and as my ears tell me), the new version of Yellow Submarine consists of remixes, which would then necessitate a remaster of those remixes. Let It Be (Naked), by definition, is also both, because all of Phil Spector's overdubs have been removed, which would dictate both a remix and a remaster.

Hope this clears things up.

Fred

I agree about apparent o.k.-ness of 'Yellow Submarine' CD (original as per Capitol LP track-listing, not last re-done change).

I used to worry about disappointing sound (tendecy to 'shrill brightness' ... on Abbey Road & Pepper CDs, but I have decided to get used to CD sound having been unfairly conditioned by good vinyl source. Now I think that the CDs are alright for listening to great old band.

quote:

Originally posted by Rockingdoc:
All I'm looking for is the original albums in both mono and stereo (preferably in the same package), with sound quality to match Let It Be Naked.

AFAIK, you'll NEVER get decent sounding stereo mixes of the first few albums, or mono mixes of the latter ones, because the master tapes were wiped and reused in the 70s.

Mastering off of vinyl might work, but the actual stereo mix on "Please please me", while interesting, is also patchy. The mouth organ pieces on the title track and "Love me do" is horrifically over-levelled, for example, so it sounds like mistracking, but isn't. I've heard two different LPs of the stereo mix (in two different systems) and the effect is present on both LPs.

I'd love to hear the mono mixes of the white album and Sgt Pepper mind you. Ditto Love's "Forever changes".