| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
mystic fred 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 13 2006
Location: Londinium
Status: Offline
Points: 4252
|
 Posted: September 10 2009 at 13:43 |
putting 24bit remasters on 16bit CD's must involve some limiting, hopefully the albums will be released in their full glory in the future - much to the puzzlement of the mastering engineers the 16bit CD's were a marketing choice by Apple Corps. 
|
 Prog Archives Tour Van 
|
 |
Padraic
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 13:53 |
 mystic fred wrote:
putting 24bit remasters on 16bit CD's must involve some limiting
|
It doesn't.
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 15:22 |
Padraic wrote:
mystic fred wrote:
putting 24bit remasters on 16bit CD's must involve some limiting
|
It doesn't.
|
Well, it doesn't NEED limiting, but I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that they did use some limiting on the stereo releases to created the illusion of 'fullness' to compensate for the lower bit rate. I could be crazy, though. Who knows.
|
|
Negoba
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 24 2008
Location: Big Muddy
Status: Offline
Points: 5208
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 15:30 |
I also read that there was no limiting on the mono, and perhaps no re-EQ either. Just re-digitizing of the mixes that the Beatles themselves actually participated in.
But I may have dreamt that.
|
|
You are quite a fine person, and I am very fond of you. But you are only quite a little fellow, in a wide world, after all.
|
|
Padraic
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 15:31 |
p0mt3 wrote:
Padraic wrote:
mystic fred wrote:
putting 24bit remasters on 16bit CD's must involve some limiting
|
It doesn't.
|
Well, it doesn't NEED limiting, but I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that they did use some limiting on the stereo releases to created the illusion of 'fullness' to compensate for the lower bit rate.
I could be crazy, though. Who knows.
|
Well you ARE crazy, but you could also be right. 
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 15:58 |
mystic fred wrote:
putting 24bit remasters on 16bit CD's must involve some limiting, hopefully the albums will be released in their full glory in the future - much to the puzzlement of the mastering engineers the 16bit CD's were a marketing choice by Apple Corps. |
Well, there's no such thing as 24-Bit CDs, really. There are HDCD and SACD which do contain extra bits, but without a special player, you're only going to be hearing the 16 bits anyway. I guess I'm trying to justify this choice as if the engineers had no choice, but in reality, they still could have mastered 20-bit CDs so that those of us who DO have HD CD players could benefit from the extra bits, but hey, what Apple Records says goes, ultimately, and I'll just be happy to have a properly packaged Beatles CD set for once.
|
|
marktheshark
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 24 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1695
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 16:08 |
mystic fred wrote:
^very true, but stereo in 1965 was not what it is today, it was still an experimental novelty, though i used to love playing with the balance control on these recordings..
the remaster engineers have only adjusted the sound of the recordings not tha actual mix, which would be difficult to do with only 2 channels....so no 5.1 surround will be available either 
..you could always place the speakers together, stand back....instant mono! 
|
Well if you listen to the previous 3 (Hard Days, For Sale & Help) albums when Abbey Road upgraded to 4 track, you can hear much better seperation than what was done on RS. Martin had both the vocals AND the instruments spread out more over the two channels. A good example is the track And I Love Her, you hear can John's acoustic on the left channel and George's on the right. I don't know what Martin and engineers were doing with Rubber Soul by putting ALL the instruments in one channel and the vocals in the other. Paul's voice on You Won't See Me sounds so tinty and John's on Nowhere Man as well. But I'm going by my MoFi pressings, I have yet to get the newbies. I'm not in a big hurry.
As for 5.1, I've listened to the mixes they did for the Yellow Sub DVD that's now out of print. Trust me, you don't want the catalog done in 5.1, they sound terrible. Remember, most of their recordings are done in 4 track, so there's not a whole lot you can do with those limitations. Abbey Road would probably make for a decent 5.1 mix being done in 8 track.
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 16:10 |
marktheshark wrote:
mystic fred wrote:
^very true, but stereo in 1965 was not what it is today, it was still an experimental novelty, though i used to love playing with the balance control on these recordings..
the remaster engineers have only adjusted the sound of the recordings not tha actual mix, which would be difficult to do with only 2 channels....so no 5.1 surround will be available either
..you could always place the speakers together, stand back....instant mono!
|
Well if you listen to the previous 3 (Hard Days, For Sale & Help) albums when Abbey Road upgraded to 4 track, you can hear much better seperation than what was done on RS. Martin had both the vocals AND the instruments spread out more over the two channels. A good example is the track And I Love Her, you hear can John's acoustic on the left channel and George's on the right. I don't know what Martin and engineers were doing with Rubber Soul by putting ALL the instruments in one channel and the vocals in the other. Paul's voice on You Won't See Me sounds so tinty and John's on Nowhere Man as well. But I'm going by my MoFi pressings, I have yet to get the newbies. I'm not in a big hurry.
As for 5.1, I've listened to the mixes they did for the Yellow Sub DVD that's now out of print. Trust me, you don't want the catalog done in 5.1, they sound terrible. Remember, most of their recordings are done in 4 track, so there's not a whole lot you can do with those limitations. Abbey Road would probably make for a decent 5.1 mix being done in 8 track. |
From what I understand, the sh*t placing of vocals are still present even in these new released. 
|
|
Padraic
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 16:13 |
p0mt3 wrote:
marktheshark wrote:
mystic fred wrote:
^very true, but stereo in 1965 was not what it is today, it was still an experimental novelty, though i used to love playing with the balance control on these recordings..
the remaster engineers have only adjusted the sound of the recordings not tha actual mix, which would be difficult to do with only 2 channels....so no 5.1 surround will be available either
..you could always place the speakers together, stand back....instant mono!
|
Well if you listen to the previous 3 (Hard Days, For Sale & Help) albums when Abbey Road upgraded to 4 track, you can hear much better seperation than what was done on RS. Martin had both the vocals AND the instruments spread out more over the two channels. A good example is the track And I Love Her, you hear can John's acoustic on the left channel and George's on the right. I don't know what Martin and engineers were doing with Rubber Soul by putting ALL the instruments in one channel and the vocals in the other. Paul's voice on You Won't See Me sounds so tinty and John's on Nowhere Man as well. But I'm going by my MoFi pressings, I have yet to get the newbies. I'm not in a big hurry.
As for 5.1, I've listened to the mixes they did for the Yellow Sub DVD that's now out of print. Trust me, you don't want the catalog done in 5.1, they sound terrible. Remember, most of their recordings are done in 4 track, so there's not a whole lot you can do with those limitations. Abbey Road would probably make for a decent 5.1 mix being done in 8 track. |
From what I understand, the sh*t placing of vocals are still present even in these new released.
|
It's weird crap like this that's making me lean towards mono. I'm on headphones all the time, vocals in one channel only would just annoy the hell out of me.
|
|
jammun
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 14 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3449
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 16:18 |
As usual, I only intended to buy a disc or two, and instead picked up the stereo box today. Ah well, would have bought them all anyway, eventually. Decided to listen to Past Masters first, since it covers the band start to finish. WOW! Who knew about that piano track on She's A Woman? On one of Ringo's fills (forget which song) you can hear the sticks barely hitting the metal of the snare rim instead of the drumskin. Can't wait to hear every album.
I tend to forget what a great rock band they were. Now I'm remembering. For anyone sitting on the fence on these, if you are a Beatles fan, from what I've heard so far these are well worth the expense.
|
|
Can you tell me where we're headin'?
Lincoln County Road or Armageddon.
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 16:36 |
Padraic wrote:
It's weird crap like this that's making me lean towards mono. I'm on headphones all the time, vocals in one channel only would just annoy the hell out of me.
|
Well, I mean, I have heard some songs they changed, but a lot of the issues were left untouched. Makes me think that the engineers just randomly picked which songs to fix and which ones to leave alone. 'Unfinished' is the term I am leaning towards, here. How can a team of modern engineers with a complete understanding of how to properly mix stereo take four years on this project, and only have half the songs properly re-mixed? Makes no sense to me. 
|
|
jammun
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 14 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3449
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 17:25 |
p0mt3 wrote:
Padraic wrote:
It's weird crap like this that's making me lean towards mono. I'm on headphones all the time, vocals in one channel only would just annoy the hell out of me.
|
Well, I mean, I have heard some songs they changed, but a lot of the issues were left untouched. Makes me think that the engineers just randomly picked which songs to fix and which ones to leave alone. 'Unfinished' is the term I am leaning towards, here. How can a team of modern engineers with a complete understanding of how to properly mix stereo take four years on this project, and only have half the songs properly re-mixed? Makes no sense to me.
|
I hate to give the record company the benefit of the doubt, but...
These are remasters, not remixes, and assuming they are using the original stereo sources, maybe there's only so much they can do with them.
That said, I wouldn't necessarily want to listen to those early 'stereo' albums (I'm now listening to With The Beatles) on headphones.
And don't worry, the remixes will be available hmm 'round about 50th anniversary time, or in four years. At which time 'The Beatles tax' will be due again. Let me tell you how this will be...
Edited by jammun - September 10 2009 at 17:34
|
|
Can you tell me where we're headin'?
Lincoln County Road or Armageddon.
|
|
marktheshark
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 24 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1695
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 17:53 |
|
Not much can be done to remix Please Please Me & With The Beatles since they were recorded on 2 track machines. I Want To Hold Your Hand was the first 4 track song and Hard Days Night was the first 4 track album.
|
|
SgtPepper67
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 17 2007
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 530
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 20:47 |
|
I haven't heard all of them yet, but WOW! It sounds incredible to me so far. It really hurt me to spend so much money for the stereo box set but it's totally worth it. I've heard A hard day's night and like someone posted before, the stereo mix sound a lot better than Rubber soul, I never understood why there's such a extreme panning on that album, but now I think the better sound makes it up a bit for the bad mixing. By the way, I also think A hard day's night sounds better in stereo, it has a more dimensional sound. I've also heard Revolver and Abbey Road and the sound is very clear, especially the bass and the bass drum, they have more punch, and also the voices sound clearer.
|
In the end the love you take is equal to the love you made...
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 21:05 |
jammun wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Padraic wrote:
It's weird crap like this that's making me lean towards mono. I'm on headphones all the time, vocals in one channel only would just annoy the hell out of me.
|
Well, I mean, I have heard some songs they changed, but a lot of the issues were left untouched. Makes me think that the engineers just randomly picked which songs to fix and which ones to leave alone. 'Unfinished' is the term I am leaning towards, here. How can a team of modern engineers with a complete understanding of how to properly mix stereo take four years on this project, and only have half the songs properly re-mixed? Makes no sense to me.
|
I hate to give the record company the benefit of the doubt, but...
These are remasters, not remixes, and assuming they are using the original stereo sources, maybe there's only so much they can do with them.
That said, I wouldn't necessarily want to listen to those early 'stereo' albums (I'm now listening to With The Beatles) on headphones.
And don't worry, the remixes will be available hmm 'round about 50th anniversary time, or in four years. At which time 'The Beatles tax' will be due again. Let me tell you how this will be... |
The problem with that analogy is that some of the songs have in fact been remixed with the vocals in both channels where before they hadn't been. Face it, the four years story was just part of the campaign to build anticipation. They're just trying to make a buck quick like usual. And here I actually believed they were doing it for the fans. Silly me.
|
|
jammun
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 14 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3449
|
Posted: September 10 2009 at 21:42 |
p0mt3 wrote:
jammun wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Padraic wrote:
It's weird crap like this that's making me lean towards mono. I'm on headphones all the time, vocals in one channel only would just annoy the hell out of me.
|
Well, I mean, I have heard some songs they changed, but a lot of the issues were left untouched. Makes me think that the engineers just randomly picked which songs to fix and which ones to leave alone. 'Unfinished' is the term I am leaning towards, here. How can a team of modern engineers with a complete understanding of how to properly mix stereo take four years on this project, and only have half the songs properly re-mixed? Makes no sense to me.
|
I hate to give the record company the benefit of the doubt, but...
These are remasters, not remixes, and assuming they are using the original stereo sources, maybe there's only so much they can do with them.
That said, I wouldn't necessarily want to listen to those early 'stereo' albums (I'm now listening to With The Beatles) on headphones.
And don't worry, the remixes will be available hmm 'round about 50th anniversary time, or in four years. At which time 'The Beatles tax' will be due again. Let me tell you how this will be... |
The problem with that analogy is that some of the songs have in fact been remixed with the vocals in both channels where before they hadn't been.
Face it, the four years story was just part of the campaign to build anticipation. They're just trying to make a buck quick like usual. And here I actually believed they were doing it for the fans. Silly me.
|
I hear ya, really. I said as much in my own roundabout way..that 'Beatles Tax' and all. As previously mentioned, give a listen to She's A Woman. Who knew, is that Meade Lux Lewis on piano, some guest star and all? Bad Boy? We tend to forget this was one kick-ass rock band, perhaps the best kick-ass rock band of all time. And these remasters sound great. I feel like I'm eleven or twelve years old again, except not quite as stupid and with considerably more pains in the joints. All's we have for now is what they've given us, with which I'm more than happy. I'll pony up the tax for the 50th, if I'm still around. In the meantime,
I should add, I bought the single of I Want To Hold Your Hand b/w I Saw Her Standing There when I was ten years old, and listened to that on a crappy stereo, and heard most of this stuff originally on a near-blown 3-4" AM radio speaker (KOMA in Oklahoma City had quite a reach), and am generally not to be trusted on matters with regard to memories regarding The Beatles. Screw Hard Days Night (the song), gimme that visceral roar of Anytime At All and When I Get Home and You Can't Do That. It's never sounded better. 'specially You Can't Do That. I used to think grunge was a '90s thing until I heard this stuff again.
Edited by jammun - September 10 2009 at 22:10
|
|
Can you tell me where we're headin'?
Lincoln County Road or Armageddon.
|
|
Man Erg
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: August 26 2004
Location: Isle of Lucy
Status: Offline
Points: 7456
|
Posted: September 11 2009 at 02:14 |
|
I believe that one of the reasons that the early albums suffer from seperation is because of George Martin's production technique.He wasn't that experienced in producing 'Rock 'n' Roll' bands. His forte lay in the production of radio shows such as The Goons etc.
Martin was well versed in using special effects and studio trickery to accompany radio sketches and dramas.Placing sounds in different places on the tape almost layering the sounds was still,(and I should imagine still is with just the availability of two tracks and bouncing across) an art as he was,in pre-Beatles/early Beatles days using 2 track recording facilities.
The basic recording of a standard 4 piece band used to be and,probably still is for demo purposes, bass,guitars keyboards etc. on one track and drums and vocals on another. Whenever I have ventured into a studio,most engineers tend to centre the vocal/drum track and pan the 'melody/rhythm' track.
Martin was stiil pioneering production/recording techniques in 1962-1965 so it's understandable why the stereo versions of the original recordings sound unbalanced at times.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
On another note (sic),I was playing the remastered Abbey Road yesterday and the splicing between the tracks on the medley seem more obvious or have my ears become for sensitive?
On The Beatles (White Album) one of my favourite tracks is Long,Long,Long.Wow! I have never heard the intro before as it was buried so far down in the mix as to be inaudible.The other revelation is the wine bottle atop the Leslie Cabinet 'accident'. When McCartney held down a chord on the organ toward the end of the track.It caused a wine bottle that had been put on top of the Leslie Cabinet to oscillate causing an eerie sound.On the remaster,this has been brought forward in the mix and sounds even stranger...fantastic stuff.
Edited by Man Erg - September 11 2009 at 12:02
|
Do 'The Stanley' otherwise I'll thrash you with some rhubarb.
|
|
JLocke
Prog Reviewer
Joined: November 18 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 4900
|
Posted: September 11 2009 at 16:13 |
jammun wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
jammun wrote:
p0mt3 wrote:
Padraic wrote:
It's weird crap like this that's making me lean towards mono. I'm on headphones all the time, vocals in one channel only would just annoy the hell out of me.
|
Well, I mean, I have heard some songs they changed, but a lot of the issues were left untouched. Makes me think that the engineers just randomly picked which songs to fix and which ones to leave alone. 'Unfinished' is the term I am leaning towards, here. How can a team of modern engineers with a complete understanding of how to properly mix stereo take four years on this project, and only have half the songs properly re-mixed? Makes no sense to me.
|
I hate to give the record company the benefit of the doubt, but...
These are remasters, not remixes, and assuming they are using the original stereo sources, maybe there's only so much they can do with them.
That said, I wouldn't necessarily want to listen to those early 'stereo' albums (I'm now listening to With The Beatles) on headphones.
And don't worry, the remixes will be available hmm 'round about 50th anniversary time, or in four years. At which time 'The Beatles tax' will be due again. Let me tell you how this will be... |
The problem with that analogy is that some of the songs have in fact been remixed with the vocals in both channels where before they hadn't been.
Face it, the four years story was just part of the campaign to build anticipation. They're just trying to make a buck quick like usual. And here I actually believed they were doing it for the fans. Silly me.
|
I hear ya, really. I said as much in my own roundabout way..that 'Beatles Tax' and all. As previously mentioned, give a listen to She's A Woman. Who knew, is that Meade Lux Lewis on piano, some guest star and all? Bad Boy? We tend to forget this was one kick-ass rock band, perhaps the best kick-ass rock band of all time. And these remasters sound great. I feel like I'm eleven or twelve years old again, except not quite as stupid and with considerably more pains in the joints. All's we have for now is what they've given us, with which I'm more than happy. I'll pony up the tax for the 50th, if I'm still around. In the meantime,
I should add, I bought the single of I Want To Hold Your Hand b/w I Saw Her Standing There when I was ten years old, and listened to that on a crappy stereo, and heard most of this stuff originally on a near-blown 3-4" AM radio speaker (KOMA in Oklahoma City had quite a reach), and am generally not to be trusted on matters with regard to memories regarding The Beatles. Screw Hard Days Night (the song), gimme that visceral roar of Anytime At All and When I Get Home and You Can't Do That. It's never sounded better. 'specially You Can't Do That. I used to think grunge was a '90s thing until I heard this stuff again. |
Perhaps I'm being too hard on these things. I haven't even received mine in the mail yet, but I'm already calling 'bullsh*t' on them. Maybe I should just stop expecting perfection from them. It just pisses me off, though, because everything about The Beatles was arguably 'perfect' EXCEPT for the production values of their work, and now once again, I feel like they still haven't been given the proper care.
|
|
Alberto Muñoz
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 26 2006
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 3577
|
Posted: September 11 2009 at 16:31 |
Seems interest to hearing the Beatles in full Remastering option.
I will buy in separate disc when i can.
Vote stereo BTW.
|
|
|
|
marktheshark
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 24 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1695
|
Posted: September 11 2009 at 16:41 |
|
I'm now downloading a few of the albums on soulseek. I still intend to get the CDs, but I want to get a taste of these. Best I could find is 320 kbps which is enough to at least get an idea on how they sound.
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
The Beatles Remasters: Mono or Stereo
), that at least on the mono version, absolutely no limiting was done. May also be true for the stereo version, but I don't know for sure.