|
Post by mikev on Sept 10, 2009 6:54:18 GMT -5
okay-before I go out and start to buy what for some albums will be a fourth purchase (8-track-vinyl-cd)-to you audiophile needle drop fans (McCabe, Beatle Bob, etc.) I would like to hear your general take on comparing the remasters with some of Dr. Ebbetts, etc. needle drop works.
You don't have to get into specifics-but I'm looking more at some of the later LPs- Revolver-Let it Be. I have many flac files and before I convert them to wav and burn them-I'm not going to spend the time if these new CDs are vastly superior.
BTW- I use bose headphones(which are a bit overrated for the price) with either the ipod (wav files) or a discman, probably more than sitting in front of my stereo Fischer speakers.
|
|
|
Post by Beatle Bob on Sept 10, 2009 9:37:35 GMT -5
What DESS (and others) have remarkably done is to replicate the vinyl experience in terms of texture, tone, ambience, feel, onto the CD format. It's the way I grew up on them and there is a certain comfort in hearing them this way for me and many others. The remasters are a different animal all together. Remastered from master tapes, not vinyl, using modern up to date remastering equipment. They used a team to work on the albums, not just George Martin (ala the '87 CDs). Sounds like they took the Dr. Ebbetts approach using a "quality control team" - which is smart! May not work perfectly, but it's smart to utilize other ears. I think these sound amazingly good now. I have to lower the bass on my stereo system as my 30 year old speakers seem to want to vibrate suddenly. I'm enjoying the newfound clarity and power of the Beatles rock and roll. Ringos drums now kick-ass. There is so much going on in these recordings that we're never defined until now. It's a new experience going through every song. These remasters are about as close as we get to being in Studio 2 at Abbey Road and hearing the tapes the way they heard the playbacks. It also doesn't disqualify the needledrop experience from DESS and others. I'm glad I think I'm open enough to appreciate both approaches and find (even though) I'm preferring the remasters, there is still a place in my collection for my DESS discs. They are still remain vital and important to me and to preserve history. Regards, Beatle Bob
|
|
|
Post by gripweed on Sept 10, 2009 10:51:12 GMT -5
What DESS (and others) have remarkably done is to replicate the vinyl experience in terms of texture, tone, ambience, feel, onto the CD format. It's the way I grew up on them and there is a certain comfort in hearing them this way for me and many others. The remasters are a different animal all together. Remastered from master tapes, not vinyl, using modern up to date remastering equipment. They used a team to work on the albums, not just George Martin (ala the '87 CDs). Sounds like they took the Dr. Ebbetts approach using a "quality control team" - which is smart! May not work perfectly, but it's smart to utilize other ears. I think these sound amazingly good now. I have to lower the bass on my stereo system as my 30 year old speakers seem to want to vibrate suddenly. I'm enjoying the newfound clarity and power of the Beatles rock and roll. Ringos drums now kick-ass. There is so much going on in these recordings that we're never defined until now. It's a new experience going through every song. These remasters are about as close as we get to being in Studio 2 at Abbey Road and hearing the tapes the way they heard the playbacks. It also doesn't disqualify the needledrop experience from DESS and others. I'm glad I think I'm open enough to appreciate both approaches and find (even though) I'm preferring the remasters, there is still a place in my collection for my DESS discs. They are still remain vital and important to me and to preserve history. Regards, Beatle Bob There still seems to be a noticeable difference of clarity and freshness between these remasters and the various takes on the Anthology CD's. What makes that difference because I don't understand it. Sounds like I am right in the studio on the Anthology CD's. Is it because of compression? I do understand that the anthology takes are before the songs are mixed down into the final master.
|
|
|
Post by Beatle Bob on Sept 10, 2009 10:57:46 GMT -5
What DESS (and others) have remarkably done is to replicate the vinyl experience in terms of texture, tone, ambience, feel, onto the CD format. It's the way I grew up on them and there is a certain comfort in hearing them this way for me and many others. The remasters are a different animal all together. Remastered from master tapes, not vinyl, using modern up to date remastering equipment. They used a team to work on the albums, not just George Martin (ala the '87 CDs). Sounds like they took the Dr. Ebbetts approach using a "quality control team" - which is smart! May not work perfectly, but it's smart to utilize other ears. I think these sound amazingly good now. I have to lower the bass on my stereo system as my 30 year old speakers seem to want to vibrate suddenly. I'm enjoying the newfound clarity and power of the Beatles rock and roll. Ringos drums now kick-ass. There is so much going on in these recordings that we're never defined until now. It's a new experience going through every song. These remasters are about as close as we get to being in Studio 2 at Abbey Road and hearing the tapes the way they heard the playbacks. It also doesn't disqualify the needledrop experience from DESS and others. I'm glad I think I'm open enough to appreciate both approaches and find (even though) I'm preferring the remasters, there is still a place in my collection for my DESS discs. They are still remain vital and important to me and to preserve history. Regards, Beatle Bob There still seems to be a noticeable difference of clarity and freshness between these remasters and the various takes on the Anthology CD's. What makes that difference because I don't understand it. Sounds like I am right in the studio on the Anthology CD's. Is it because of compression? I do understand that the anthology takes are before the songs are mixed down into the final master. Anthology CDs used early 90's technology. Some early stereo mixes on the outtakes were very narrow, seemingly close to being mono mixes. If you have rips of the remastered audio from the DVD's of the outtakes and remixes you'll hear a discernable difference over what was issued on the CDs a few years earlier. If you thought you were in the studio with the Beatles on the Anthology CDs wait until you hear these remasters. They will blow you away. That's not an understatement Regards, Beatle Bob
|
|
|
Post by gripweed on Sept 10, 2009 11:05:49 GMT -5
There still seems to be a noticeable difference of clarity and freshness between these remasters and the various takes on the Anthology CD's. What makes that difference because I don't understand it. Sounds like I am right in the studio on the Anthology CD's. Is it because of compression? I do understand that the anthology takes are before the songs are mixed down into the final master. Anthology CDs used early 90's technology. Some early stereo mixes on the outtakes were very narrow, seemingly close to being mono mixes. If you have rips of the remastered audio from the DVD's of the outtakes and remixes you'll hear a discernable difference over what was issued on the CDs a few years earlier. If you thought you were in the studio with the Beatles on the Anthology CDs wait until you hear these remasters. They will blow you away. That's not an understatement Regards, Beatle Bob Yeah, I really noticed that as I watching anthology on VH1HD. They were awesome. Do you think we will ever get those kind of remixing? Nostalgia and hearing it as it was orginally recorded is all good but I wouldn't hesitate to shell out more of my hard earned cash for that type of quality.
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Sept 10, 2009 12:04:52 GMT -5
What DESS (and others) have remarkably done is to replicate the vinyl experience in terms of texture, tone, ambience, feel, onto the CD format. It's the way I grew up on them and there is a certain comfort in hearing them this way for me and many others. The remasters are a different animal all together. Remastered from master tapes, not vinyl, using modern up to date remastering equipment. They used a team to work on the albums, not just George Martin (ala the '87 CDs). Sounds like they took the Dr. Ebbetts approach using a "quality control team" - which is smart! May not work perfectly, but it's smart to utilize other ears. I think these sound amazingly good now. I have to lower the bass on my stereo system as my 30 year old speakers seem to want to vibrate suddenly. I'm enjoying the newfound clarity and power of the Beatles rock and roll. Ringos drums now kick-ass. There is so much going on in these recordings that we're never defined until now. It's a new experience going through every song. These remasters are about as close as we get to being in Studio 2 at Abbey Road and hearing the tapes the way they heard the playbacks. It also doesn't disqualify the needledrop experience from DESS and others. I'm glad I think I'm open enough to appreciate both approaches and find (even though) I'm preferring the remasters, there is still a place in my collection for my DESS discs. They are still remain vital and important to me and to preserve history. Regards, Beatle Bob Thanks BB-I understand comparing the two is a bit of apples and oranges-but your answer to my question was expressed appropriately to help me make a decision.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 10, 2009 12:59:41 GMT -5
Okay, I know McCabe, Beatle Bob and mikev love "needledrops" but for slugs like me is that recordings onto a blank compact disc from a nice, clean vinyl record: from turntable to computer to c.d. burner(maybe skipping the computer in some set-ups)?
|
|
|
Post by Beatle Bob on Sept 10, 2009 14:53:50 GMT -5
Okay, I know McCabe, Beatle Bob and mikev love "needledrops" but for slugs like me is that recordings onto a blank compact disc from a nice, clean vinyl record: from turntable to computer to c.d. burner(maybe skipping the computer in some set-ups)? Yup. Not many do it very well. Dr. Ebbetts is probably the best of 'em all. Unfortunately he called it quits recently. I guess it was a smart decision being with these remasters coming out - he probably felt "the heat" from Apple Regards, Beatle Bob
|
|
Joseph McCabe
Very Clean
A rebel to his last breath ...
Posts: 912
|
Post by Joseph McCabe on Sept 10, 2009 15:18:13 GMT -5
I haven't done a proper comparison yet (only 24 hrs in a day!). But my "aural memory" tells me that the remasters, both mono & stereo, do trump Ebbetts - but not by much.
However, Ebbetts gave us MUCH more than just needledrops of the standard albums. Think of his GET BACK albums. Think of his genuine YS mono issue, containing the long 8-minute It's All Too Much. (The MONO MASTER has only the standard 6-minute version in mono.)
Think of his CASUALTIES, COLLECTORS ITEMS, SESSIONS albums. The list goes on - HOLLYWOOD BOWL COMPLETE, LAST LICKS LIVE (rooftop concert), CHRISTMAS ALBUM, DECCA AUDITION. All in excellent quality. (Hint, hint, Apple! Lots more money to be made from us fans, so come on!)
|
|
|
Post by Beatle Bob on Sept 10, 2009 15:42:57 GMT -5
I was and am still a big supporter of DESS (and still swear by his work), but the fact that the remasters are from master tapes and not sourced from pristine virgin vinyl, (using modern advanced equipment/technology) that wasn't available back in '87,makes all the difference in the world to some. Of the remasters--what I've heard so far, it's literally mind-blowing. How can DESS ever compete with the original master tapes now that it's been done right? DESS releases are still phenomenal releases, so don't get me wrong. Apple is now giving us the ultimate reproductions from master tapes. DESS gives us the ultimate from pristine virgin vinyl. Two different point of views. Up until now the Beatles catalog on CD was a joke and their attention to detail, and what collector's wanted was a joke. DESS presented the best of what was on original vinyl (up to this point, the '87 CDs could not compete with DESS releases in any way shape or form). DESS releases still give you the albums the way we remember hearing them on vinyl and replicated the labels (which is what EMI is copying now, but not perfectly) and bettered anything EMI ever offered us on CD. For the vinyl drops he made, there is a difference in over-all presence, ambiance and warmth that the '87 CDs lacked: The original pristine virgin vinyl needle drops by DESS were able to overcome and overshadow the legitimate releases each and every time. Each of his releases were an embarrasment to EMI and put their work to shame in each and every possible way. The DESS catalog has many titles and mixes not being released by EMI, that make many of his releases still relevant and necessary.There still is a place for DESS CDs in my collection no matter how good these new remasters are. They do not loose their importance, or vitality and equally will share shelf space with the remasters in my house. I miss DESS. Regards, Beatle Bob
|
|