I have had it up to here waiting for the Beatles catalogue to be remastered

yeah, "white album" and "abbey road" sound great. I also got "revolver", which is also quite improved, and "rubber soul". Somehow, for that one, I end up liking it less than I remembered. Nothing to do with the sound, which doesn't blast me as much as the others still, but I just realized I like less songs than I thought.

Now I'm hesitating between "pepper", "MMT" and "past masters" : is "pepper" improved much ? I have listened to the mono remaster version and frankly, I don't see the point compared to the stereo, soundwise...

oups, ok, I might get "MMT", then !

and I mean, I don't see the point in mono remaster versions comparend to stereo version, in general, not just on "pepper" which stereo remaster I haven't heard yet... I'm confused this morning !

Past masters is MASSIVELY IMPROVED and disc 2 is my most listened f all of these remasters.

hum... so I'm hesitating again... "pepper" is not THAT improved then ?

I'm beginning to suspect these remasters were done by Paul's mum.

They're all improved, is the simple answer; buy whichever ones have your favourite songs on.

damn. that's all of them.

xpost

yeah, I suppose that's the best answer...
I will go to the store during lunch break and let the feeling guide me.

Blimey, The Feeling! I'd forgotten all about them!

They must've got that job in HMV of asking you if you've found everything you were looking for. Good on them.

xpost - hey nate i think you are thinking of Electronic Sound by harrison.

Doh! You're right, thanks.

xxpost - Thanks for the peeling info Guilty. It's a very clean copy that I'm 99% certain has a butcher cover underneath. But if it's really worth more unpeeled... that could save me some saliva.

i'm confused, what needs peeling from these albums?

the White Album (stereo) sounds awesome and, excepting the mono Pepper's, is my fave of all these remasters--heck, the bird sounds on "Blackbird" alone are worth the price of the new edition.

Nick?

xp

Nothing needs peeling from the remasters; the peeling is ONLY on LP copies of the Yesterday & Today US album, where the butchers' dolls cover has been stuck over with the safe cover.

Is there going to be a poll on which is the best remaster? (Or have I missed it?)

Yes, but it didn't get any love. Boo hoo.

so I went with MMT today (hesitated a lot between "MMT" and "pepper" but since I haven't heard MMT for a long time, thought it would be more exciting... of course, I guess I'll get "pepper" next week or something).
about the monos, I think it's been discussed a lot already but I find the sound so tiny and smothered compared to the amazement that are the stereo remasters.
also, about stereo remaster : it's funny how they differ from the tracks on "love". like, even though "USSR" has been improved a lot on the "white album", it's nowhere near the power on the "love" version.

is "pepper" improved much ? I have listened to the mono remaster version and frankly, I don't see the point compared to the stereo, soundwise...

― AlXTC from Paris, Friday, October 2, 2009 9:32 AM (3 hours ago) Bookmark

For me, the Pepper mono was the most improved--I actually like it now as it sounds less harsh and grating--but I suppose I could have had that experience by tracking down a mono LP...the stereo remaster of the white album seems almost indistinguishable from the 1987 cd, but maybe I wasn't listening closely enough. Abbey Road in remastered stereo on the other hand was mindblowingly different sounding to me

there's one track that I feel doesn't change much with the remasters on the "white album" : "happiness is a warm gun". of course the sound is better but it's not GREAT.
one of the songs I like much more since I have the remaster is "birthday". I'd always thought it was useless but now it makes sense in a raw-powerful-fun way.
"pepper" in mono : I was very interested after reading here that it was the version they had originally worked the most on but I wasn't impressed. I guess, as someone said elsewhere, I'm too used to stereo to enjoy it.

is there a definitive article anywhere on this mono/stereo business?

i've read somewhere that ALL were mixed primarily for stereo. i doubt that, but SPLHCB is certainly better in stereo.

is there a definitive article anywhere on this mono/stereo business?

i've read somewhere that ALL were mixed primarily for stereo. i doubt that, but SPLHCB is certainly better in stereo.

― history mayne, Friday, October 2, 2009 1:46 PM (2 minutes ago) Bookmark Suggest Ban Permalink

No, that's backwards, some engineer made a big deal about saying how the Beatles spent weeks on the mono mixes and weren't even really around for the stereo mixes which were for the American market. I had the exact opposite feeling about Sgt Pepper, that it finally sounded good in mono....horses for courses!

don't trust the sound of wack mp3s, re: mono.

nah i got good flacs. geir is right that mono is inferior. in an ideal world the stereo versions would not have been quote so extreme in their separation, but tbh the stereo versions in most cases are better.

They spent longer on the mono mixes because they did those first; after they'd mixed them for mono they just stretched them out to stereo - most of the work already being done. There's no right or wrong about what's better - what's better is the versions you prefer. I prefer stereo.

My main reason for buying the mono boxset was: I've heard these albums so many times, probably far more than any others albums. I know pretty much every second on every album inside-out - I just wanted to hear them differently.

Plus I love the little replica sleeves!

oh, i agree the stereo mixes are mostly preferable for the post-Pepper's stuff, but man that mono SPLHCB mix just rules! so much to hear; so many different sounds/noises to notice. it's almost an entirely different record than the stereo version, to my ears. early stuff sounds just fine either way to me. but then i always listen through speakers, so the severe panning wouldn't bug me too much.

oh, i agree the stereo mixes are mostly preferable for the post-Pepper's stuff, but man that mono SPLHCB mix just rules! so much to hear; so many different sounds/noises to notice. it's almost an entirely different record than the stereo version, to my ears
― a single man owns you (Ioannis), Friday, October 2, 2009 2:28 PM (5 hours ago) Bookmark

Exactly! It is a radically different experience than the stereo one we all grew up on...how about the different whoops in the reprise? that really threw me for a loop...and the laughing at the end of wywy. i could go on and on

The remastering really fuels the second disc on the white album. I've been cranking the shit out of Birthday, Yer Blues, Helter Skelter, and Me & My Monkey. And Revolution 9 sounds incredible, I must say.

hahahahah weeeee...got the White Album at lunchtime. Dear Prudence right now, almost brings tears to my eyes. So full and omg it's like there's a band playing right.inside.my.head.
It's not right that I should be enjoying myself this much while still at work.

"Sgt. Pepper" is nothing without hearing John travelling from one side to the other during "A Day In The Life".

Geir OTM

In many ways, Martin and Emerick must have been liberated to experiment a lot in the stereo mixes, without the close supervision of the Beatles.

And if Paul et al were unhappy with the results, those certainly wouldn't be the standard versions of the last 40 years, plus the primary remaster sources.

MONO BACKLASH!

In many ways, Martin and Emerick must have been liberated to experiment a lot in the stereo mixes, without the close supervision of the Beatles.

They were their producer and their engineer after all, so why not?

haha i love the back and forth on stereo vs mono

honestly the thing this points out for me is its sad that the monos aren't individually available

having listened more...I think i would go for all the early stuff up through beatles for sale on mono...but i would swap revolver and have that on mono and have beatles for sale on stereo.

but the real early albums mono is just heads and tails above the stereo mixes, so much tougher and more rock sounding to me

yeah -- haven't heard the whole stereo box, so I'm just going off the few mono remasters that also have the 60s stereo mixes, but the early stuff on there sounds much better in mono. "tougher" is the right word.

^^^word.

I thought the word was love? I'm confused.

it's all good, man. peace.

While My Guitar Gently Weeps sounds MASSIVE. Like symphony orchestra huge. YES!

The bass sounds incredible on that one.

but the real early albums mono is just heads and tails above the stereo mixes, so much tougher and more rock sounding to me

One of the reasons why I prefer stereo. Beatles aren't rock, they are pop!

I think you meant to say, "One of the reasons why stereo is better than mono." I have no idea what this word "prefer" means.

^Quit bustin' his chops. He's finally trying to apply the language of subjectivity here!

Who is he and what has he done with Geir?

(also: ONE OF US, ONE OF US, GOOBLE GOBBLE, GOOBLE GOBBLE)

These remasters have forced me to revise my positon on Paul quite considerably. He's still kind of a twat, but the remasters make the music, um, closer? It's hard to hold an objective opinion about sentimentality when the damn music makes you FEEL so strongly. Gah.

Weird sister: don't forget "the walrus was Paul". He was really great.