wooltonian
Very Clean
"Football isn't a matter of life and death - it's much more important than that." Bill Shankly.
Posts: 796
|
Post by wooltonian on Sept 14, 2009 4:59:57 GMT -5
I've been reading with huge interest everybody's comments and observations about the remasters. Now that a few days have passed and the dust has settled a bit, I'm getting this nagging feeling at the back of my mind about the way the conversation is turning...
By concentrating so much on the micro-detail of each CD...on the form and not the spirit and joy of the music, are we actually sucking the fun out of our whole Beatles experience? Are we becoming a board of obsessives, twitching and writhing over every minute detail and nuance in the music. Is this really what it's supposed to be about?
Do we all really need a trip down the pub to just chill out a little bit and get some sense of perspective about these CDs? I don't know - what do you think?
Somebody said on another thread that the most exciting time he had listening to the Beatles was hearing it for the first time on a tinny transistor radio 'back in the day'. I see exactly where he's coming from. By pouring over our stereos, mulling over every subtle variation in form and sound aren't we just turning the whole thing into a cold science - a joyless trainspotter's convention...?
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Sept 14, 2009 6:20:39 GMT -5
I agree with you Woolie, but I'm aware that I'm out of step with everyone here anyway.
It was Thank Your Lucky Stars in 1963 with me. My first Beatle purchases were beatle For Sale and Help! (albums released on reel-to-reel tape - we had a tape recorder by no record player). Revolver was the first vinyl LP, and I had a cosmetics-case-type record player. I bought everything in mono because the warnings on the albums about playing stereo records on mono equiment were scary.
I didn't get my first stereo deck until after they'd split, and Hello Goodbye on the US MMT album (import) blew my socks off when I heard it in stereo. So then I had to get everything in stereo. I became aware that sometimes there were differences between stereo and mono but, to be frank, they weren't massive differences.
I was living out in the sticks and had pretty much never heard of bootlegs - I knew there was a version of Revolution out there with shoobydoowahs (I remembered it from the promo) but I had no idea how much other stuff existed. The Star-Club, Hollywood Bowl and Decca audtion albums all came as huge surprises.
When I finally got on the internet I was staggered at how much bootleg stuff was readily available and I nearly drowned in an orgy of stuff I hadn't heard before. As someone who had spent 25 years listenening to, essentially, just one version of every song, the shock of hearing alternates was almost physical. Never mind the piccolo trumpet at the end of Penny Lane, listen to all these! And then along came the Anthology.
Maybe that's part of the problem. Maybe I'm sated. The minimal differences which were so important 20 years ago simply aren't that important to me any more. Yes, the catalogue is long overdue for remastering and I'm pleased they are out. But it's too late for me - they carry no excitement value whatsoever, and I'm deeply disappointed not to be excited at a major Beatles event for the first time since 1963. Although, hooray, I've saved a bunch of money I haven't got.
And I don't want this to come over rudely, although I suspect it might, but I'm watching the excitement (and, yes, obsession) here and I'm thinking "Was that me?"
Don't get me wrong. I love the music - always have, still do - but it isn't as important to me as it once was. Give me something new, and hooray (Love went straight on my shelves) but this lot - meh.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2009 7:29:29 GMT -5
I'm not sure about this whole remaster thing anyway....can it really make THAT much difference to the songs....
that's why i haven't bought any yet....i'm just not sure...
and if i dont buy them,it doesn't matter because i've got all the songs anyway...
i find the Beatles songs are great to play on the guitar and with my playing i do the opposite to the remasters...i unmaster them..
and here's something that continually comes to mind...i need thicker walls..it'd be soooooo embarrassing if someone actually heard my beatley racket.... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Beatle Bob on Sept 14, 2009 8:15:35 GMT -5
By concentrating so much on the micro-detail of each CD...on the form and not the spirit and joy of the music, are we actually sucking the fun out of our whole Beatles experience? Are we becoming a board of obsessives, twitching and writhing over every minute detail and nuance in the music. Is this really what it's supposed to be about? I'm finding listeing to these remasters revelatory! I'm rediscovering their songs. It's literally joyfull!We've missed so much as there was a cloud over these recordings all these years. It's truely as close to being in Studio 2 Abbey Road studio and hearing a playback. Technology to reproduce these recording for home use has finally arrived to the point of it actually being studio quality on my stero system. I'm blown away. Maybe I'm Amazed, eh? Regards, Beatle Bob
|
|
nine
Very Clean
Posts: 840
|
Post by nine on Sept 14, 2009 10:01:47 GMT -5
I'm not sure about this whole remaster thing anyway....can it really make THAT much difference to the songs.... that's why i haven't bought any yet....i'm just not sure... and if i dont buy them,it doesn't matter because i've got all the songs anyway... i find the Beatles songs are great to play on the guitar and with my playing i do the opposite to the remasters...i unmaster them.. and here's something that continually comes to mind...i need thicker walls..it'd be soooooo embarrassing if someone actually heard my beatley racket.... ;D Check this bloke out. This isn't you is it, blasting away on Beatle tracks?
|
|
|
Post by fabdba on Sept 14, 2009 18:37:19 GMT -5
(Yes, I just figured out how to do the quote-thingy...fiendish thingy...seen Help too many times this past week I believe!)
Plus, I really needed this remasters event...
We all have problems, sure, but lately it's been kind of overwhelming for me, day to day. These remasters are a very welcome diversion and if its obsessive, at least it's not self-destructive. And yes, I truly am hearing things I did not hear before.
Not all of my reactions have been good, but mostly very positive. At least it's some sort of reaction - I've been numbly hanging on lately.
But I can always count on this band, and this band only, to give me a therapeutic fix when I need it. So now and then I throw money at them, collect obsessively, over-analyze, etc. for my sanity...really.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 14, 2009 21:41:09 GMT -5
. . . i find the Beatles songs are great to play on the guitar and with my playing i do the opposite to the remasters...i unmaster them.. I nominate this line as one of the all-time best lines ever written on this or the old board. Good on you! It cracked me up.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Sept 16, 2009 10:21:24 GMT -5
Yes. I have.
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Sept 16, 2009 16:48:08 GMT -5
Maybe so ? Have I listened to them all? Yes I have but I committed sacrilege and ripped them down to MP3 (at a decent 256kbps mind) for listen on my long car journey to work and back home over the last week.
I am pretty familiar with all these songs as I have known them virtually my whole life even though I am a kid of the 70s so have no real memory of the Beatles original releases. I have heard every solo track as well bar some of the rare stuff like b-sides and the odd Ringo album.
I have to say that overall there is a certain clarity that was not apparent on the 20 year old 80s CDs . You can hear John, George and Paul clearly and separately when they are singing harmony or backing vocals The drums have more depth and sometimes too much treble (did I really say that?). The re-mastering doesn't seem to have been made to a brickwall loudness that a lot of re-mastering aims for in the 21st century. What I can't work out is why some songs sound much better and jump out straight away yet others sound hardly any different ?
But I'm sure people said this 20 years ago. Weren't those CDs seen as state of the art in the days before the Berlin Wall came down ? It may just be that the re-masters are a bit of fine tuning and that our sound systems got better as well. That said I have re-discovered some of the hidden gems on the early albums like "I've Just Seen A Face" and even "Ps I Love You" and that "She's Leaving Home" is so much better in mono. I don;t think I'm obsessed just re-focused for a while. I will then move on and listen to someone else for a break. But you can never leave the Beatles alone for too long can you ?
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 16, 2009 22:22:09 GMT -5
Although the new remasters and future remasters (not remixes) will be the fidelity standard, and their sound will continue to be touted "as the way the Beatles wanted them to sound," for me, I think when all is said and done, my vinyl will still be my treasures. When I talk about having every Beatle album, it's the vinyl I reference. THAT's the collection.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 17, 2009 5:16:17 GMT -5
Although the new remasters and future remasters (not remixes) will be the fidelity standard, and their sound will continue to be touted "as the way the Beatles wanted them to sound," for me, I think when all is said and done, my vinyl will still be my treasures. When I talk about having every Beatle album, it's the vinyl I reference. THAT's the collection. Then toss out the CDs. And if you say that it's a matter of being "a collector", you even say that it's the vinyl that's the collection.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 17, 2009 7:43:07 GMT -5
Then toss out the CDs. And if you say that it's a matter of being "a collector", you even say that it's the vinyl that's the collection. Welllllll, there's nothing rational about being a collector. In the big scheme of things, it's all junk anyway, and we're living in the material world and I'm just a material girl.
|
|
|
Post by pbirdchat on Sept 17, 2009 8:57:30 GMT -5
Of all the Remastered songs that I've heard, the ones that are also remixed on LOVE are much better. I'm glad I have the Remasters but I hate to know that there are better versions out there. Someone said that Apple has remixes already done. I wish that would have come out first.
|
|
|
Post by revolver66 on Sept 17, 2009 13:32:17 GMT -5
Of all the Remastered songs that I've heard, the ones that are also remixed on LOVE are much better. I'm glad I have the Remasters but I hate to know that there are better versions out there. Someone said that Apple has remixes already done. I wish that would have come out first. I have no problem with Remixes as long as the Original Versions are also available. For all the People who likes Sub Songtrack and Love many others hated them and thought is was down right wrong to mess with the Music. Also many thought of Love as a Novelty(worth listening to once and then sitting it on the shelf). I liked both very much. I'm always a sucker for Something New or different by the Beatles! Who knows? Maybe remixes will only be available as Downloads or as a New Complete Remix Boxset
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Sept 17, 2009 17:07:26 GMT -5
Give me remixes. Give me something new, Apple, and I will give you some more of my money. But you don't get anything for the remasters.
|
|
|
Post by Beatle Bob on Sept 17, 2009 17:57:42 GMT -5
If you guys want 3 CDs worth of remixes, do what I did. Take the complete or mostly complete remxies from the ANTHOLOGY DVD soundtrack, YSS, the 3 or 4 from LIBN, and the mostly complete straight remixes from LOVE. Sounds phenomenal. It's like having remixed "Red" and "Blue" albums. Regards, Beatle Bob
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 17, 2009 17:59:00 GMT -5
Give me remixes. Give me something new, Apple, and I will give you some more of my money. But you don't get anything for the remasters. Maybe the Beatles can record brand new music for you? You're the only guy who's missing out, vectis. Apple's doing just fine with these sales.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Sept 18, 2009 6:44:48 GMT -5
I'm not missing out at all. I already have all this stuff, and I'm not prepared to shell out big bucks to buy something for the 4th time for a minimal improvment in my personal listening quality. If Apple offers me something new - like the Anthology DVDs, LIBN, Love, then they can have some more of my money. But they ain't getting it for these! And yes, I'm sure they are worried all the way to the bank!
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 19, 2009 10:22:28 GMT -5
Here's my analogy to this remastering thing - film. If a movie was done in black and white because there was no color at the time, an argument can be made to colorize it. However, if a film was done in black and white deliberately, like Young Frankenstein, it should never be done in color. So, certainly the entire catalog should have been remastered, like film restoration, but I think the mono recordings should not have been remastered in stereo.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2009 7:06:17 GMT -5
I'm not sure about this whole remaster thing anyway....can it really make THAT much difference to the songs.... that's why i haven't bought any yet....i'm just not sure... and if i dont buy them,it doesn't matter because i've got all the songs anyway... i find the Beatles songs are great to play on the guitar and with my playing i do the opposite to the remasters...i unmaster them.. and here's something that continually comes to mind...i need thicker walls..it'd be soooooo embarrassing if someone actually heard my beatley racket.... ;D Check this bloke out. This isn't you is it, blasting away on Beatle tracks? No it's not me......but it could be if i was ever the type to put myself on youtube.... ;D
|
|
|
Post by Cosmos on Sept 22, 2009 15:41:38 GMT -5
Here's my analogy to this remastering thing - film. If a movie was done in black and white because there was no color at the time, an argument can be made to colorize it. However, if a film was done in black and white deliberately, like Young Frankenstein, it should never be done in color. So, certainly the entire catalog should have been remastered, like film restoration, but I think the mono recordings should not have been remastered in stereo. sayne; As a bit of a film buff myself, I must totally disagree with you (perhaps for the first time ever on this board? ;D). Black & White WAS just as deliberate BECAUSE there were no other options. Everything that went in to making the film (or LP) was designed with that very end-goal on mind. No way do I ever wish to see my beloved film noir "colorized" and this goes for all of the true classic movies, for me. I'll grant you, long about AHDN, things were beginning to turn a bit and I believe that the engineers and performers both were looking hopefully toward the future of the "stereo" phenomenon and what it could potentially offer to recorded music. This stated, I still find myself MUCH more blown-away by the note-by-note, obsessively doted-over MONO Sgt. Pepper's. Even though my base premise would be that the Stereo should be the "better" version for a psychedelic icon such as this (i.e. to be able to pan & otherwise "mess" with the mix) such a preconception turns out to be dead wrong, in my opinion. In essence; the second line of your statement clearly contradicts the final one that you make...which is totally unlike you, and surely a puzzlement to me. Perhaps you could refine your sentiments on the subject a bit?
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 22, 2009 20:23:25 GMT -5
. . . In essence; the second line of your statement clearly contradicts the final one that you make...which is totally unlike you, and surely a puzzlement to me. . . Maybe it's because I was so unceremoniously painted into a corner by someone in another thread and I have yet to recover.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 22, 2009 20:36:12 GMT -5
. . . In essence; the second line of your statement clearly contradicts the final one that you make...which is totally unlike you, and surely a puzzlement to me. Perhaps you could refine your sentiments on the subject a bit? But, seriously, I'm not seeing it. I was taught that if someone isn't getting what you are saying or misinterpreting what you've said, it's not there fault, it's yours. So, maybe I'm not making myself clear. I'll try again, without the analogy to film. I think that anything that was deliberately recorded in mono should stay mono. Anything recorded in stereo should stay stereo. Good, bad, or indifferent. That's a bias I have. Back to analogies. When one looks at a photo of the Mona Lisa, that's NOT the Mona Lisa. It's a copy. Even though it may be bigger and clearer and brighter than the real thing, it is NOT the Mona Lisa. If one restores the Mona Lisa, that's one thing. But, if they Photoshop it, put it in a frame, and hang it, it is not the Mona Lisa. Therefore, to me, if they remaster a mono recording, that's cool. But, if they take the mono and release it in stereo, it's not the original. Maybe it's better, but it is not the real thing. That's just me.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Sept 23, 2009 5:34:12 GMT -5
Therefore, to me, if they remaster a mono recording, that's cool. But, if they take the mono and release it in stereo, it's not the original. Maybe it's better, but it is not the real thing. That's just me. But then why were you condoning colorization of blak & white films a while back? I read your rationale about "if they wanted color back then but just couldn't do it at the time, then it's okay", but I don't agree with that as a film fan. It's a descration to the original work of art.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Sept 23, 2009 6:13:42 GMT -5
I'm quite happy to watch a colourised King Kong as long as the original is still out there.
I'd be extremely happy to watch colourised Paramount Popeye cartoons (made in black and white for cost reasons except for the 3 Technicolour 2-reelers) as long as the originals were still there.
I'd be quite happy to listen to tracks from With The Beatles with more sophisticated instrumentation mixed in AS LONG AS THE ORIGINALS WERE STILL AVAILABLE.
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Sept 23, 2009 10:13:30 GMT -5
I'm quite happy to watch a colourised King Kong as long as the original is still out there. I'd be extremely happy to watch colourised Paramount Popeye cartoons (made in black and white for cost reasons except for the 3 Technicolour 2-reelers) as long as the originals were still there. I'd be quite happy to listen to tracks from With The Beatles with more sophisticated instrumentation mixed in AS LONG AS THE ORIGINALS WERE STILL AVAILABLE. I agree. If colorizing a movie attracts a new audience (my kids REFUSE to watch B & W movies) why not? I know B & W is an art form, but art can be altered/reinterpreted/revisited. You can always buy the version you want.
|
|
|
Post by beatleroadie on Sept 23, 2009 11:11:44 GMT -5
In short, no I don't think I'm too obsessive about the remasters. Can't speak for anyone else though. I bought the mono box set, plus stereo discs of Let it Be, Abbey Road and Past Masters. I love it all, and going through these mono mixes has been a lot of fun.
Sure, Apple may release the entire catalog remixed one day, but first of all, given Apple's track record that is going to be a "long long long time"...I'm glad I made the investment to hear these songs in an improved format that I can enjoy more that the '87 CDs for the next 5-10 years until that happens. Believe me, I'll get my money's worth!
I seriously doubt the catalog will be released in 5.1 Blu-Ray remixed anytime soon, if ever. Blu-ray isn't a proven format yet because in five year's time, movies and HQ audio will be much easier to download electronically anyway. Blu-ray is like a weird transitional technology to me that I think will get overtaken quickly and not have a decade-plus run like DVD has enjoyed.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmos on Sept 23, 2009 15:07:01 GMT -5
. . . In essence; the second line of your statement clearly contradicts the final one that you make...which is totally unlike you, and surely a puzzlement to me. Perhaps you could refine your sentiments on the subject a bit? But, seriously, I'm not seeing it. I was taught that if someone isn't getting what you are saying or misinterpreting what you've said, it's not there fault, it's yours. So, maybe I'm not making myself clear. I'll try again, without the analogy to film. I think that anything that was deliberately recorded in mono should stay mono. Anything recorded in stereo should stay stereo. Good, bad, or indifferent. That's a bias I have. Back to analogies. When one looks at a photo of the Mona Lisa, that's NOT the Mona Lisa. It's a copy. Even though it may be bigger and clearer and brighter than the real thing, it is NOT the Mona Lisa. If one restores the Mona Lisa, that's one thing. But, if they Photoshop it, put it in a frame, and hang it, it is not the Mona Lisa. Therefore, to me, if they remaster a mono recording, that's cool. But, if they take the mono and release it in stereo, it's not the original. Maybe it's better, but it is not the real thing. That's just me. Yeah; that's what I figured...we just seem destined to agree with one another. LOL! Had this been your original post, I would have followed it; no problem sayne. However the other meanderings begged for another try.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmos on Sept 23, 2009 15:17:03 GMT -5
. . . In essence; the second line of your statement clearly contradicts the final one that you make...which is totally unlike you, and surely a puzzlement to me. . . Maybe it's because I was so unceremoniously painted into a corner by someone in another thread and I have yet to recover. Agreed; that is why I only quoted Plato and quickly moved on. Even this unbaited hook managed to snag some seaweed! I guess on this board drugs and religion should just never be mentioned (though politics always seems to work out fine). Whenever a thread tends toward cutting personal remarks, rather than valuable commentary or making a reasonable point, I simply lose interest.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Sept 23, 2009 21:55:48 GMT -5
I'm quite happy to watch a colourised King Kong as long as the original is still out there . . . Enjoy the colorized "A Hard Days Night", then. To each his own.
|
|