|
Post by Beatle Bob on Oct 2, 2009 8:43:34 GMT -5
Ok. Universally, the critics and fans alike have given the remasters excellent reviews. It seems like the wait was worth it and Apple really did spare no expense in getting these albums remastered correctly. We hear more than we ever heard in these recordings. Things jump out at you not only in stereo, but in mono. Drums kick start songs and pound away driving songs. Paul's bass is now not a strain to discern. Vocals as clear as if they are singing in your living room. So here's the question.... would a remixed Beatles catalog be worth issuing? Is it necessary? Regards, Beatle Bob
|
|
|
Post by revolver66 on Oct 2, 2009 10:45:52 GMT -5
You make a good point. However there would be a market for Remixing and 5.1 etc. Now how well these would sell is another story. I guess it would come down to positive reviews or the remixes etc truly offering even better quality than we already have(which would be tough). I guess it would make the Beatles more modern which would appeal to some. I am happy with what we got. Also remixes aren't neccesarily better and many purists are totally against them
|
|
|
Post by Beatle Bob on Oct 2, 2009 11:40:31 GMT -5
What started this thread for me is that I've had some emails with a few collector friends and the debate seems to be split 50/50 as to whether they want remixes or not -- being we're all enjoying these remasters so much....so many revelatory things that we never expected. Revelatory things that you'd expect from a remix not a remaster. Some feel a remixed catalog would be superflous now, while others feel it's inevitable that it will happen. I like the remixes from Anthology, LIBN, YSS and the few ones on the Love soundtrack. I'm more impressed in comparison with the remasters currently.I'm personally still mixed about a remixed catalog. I believe it will be of the "you hate it" or "love it" variety and not sure which I'd fall into? I am leaning towards no remixes though, feeling it might be a let down and overall a very large "fucking with history" -- and my wallet! Regards, Beatle Bob
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Oct 2, 2009 13:10:20 GMT -5
I have yet to invest. I was going to purchase Let it Be and Abbey Road at Costco, where they usually sell for $9.99. But no way at $12.99 with no hard plastic jewel covers (I understand why-but).
Anyway I can't weigh in yet other than to say I personally would be more likely to invest in a remix, especially if it offered a 5:1 mix.
|
|
|
Post by vectisfabber on Oct 2, 2009 18:29:09 GMT -5
Yes. I want remixes. I want mixes where I can pick out 5 distinct elements seperated into 5 distinct channels all at the same time. I don't want these at the expense of the remasters (which I personally don't want), I want them as well.
|
|
|
Post by ursamajor on Oct 2, 2009 23:53:59 GMT -5
I wanna know what happened to Real Love and Free As A Bird ?
Are they not considered part of the Beatles discography ?
If a remix version of the catalogue ever comes out, these two songs should be on Past Masters and yes I do want remixes of everything.
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Oct 3, 2009 6:07:17 GMT -5
I wanna know what happened to Real Love and Free As A Bird ? Are they not considered part of the Beatles discography ? If a remix version of the catalogue ever comes out, these two songs should be on Past Masters and yes I do want remixes of everything. I would guess since they were recorded in the 90s-they wouldn't merit the same treatment-but if better technology can better restore John's voice especially on Free As a Bird, I would love to hear a remix.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 3, 2009 10:48:17 GMT -5
I wanna know what happened to Real Love and Free As A Bird ? Are they not considered part of the Beatles discography ? If a remix version of the catalogue ever comes out, these two songs should be on Past Masters and yes I do want remixes of everything. I would guess since they were recorded in the 90s-they wouldn't merit the same treatment-but if better technology can better restore John's voice especially on Free As a Bird, I would love to hear a remix. But even if they couldn't be improved, it would have been nice to have "Free As A Bird" and "Real Love" added to Past Masters. I can hardly ever get myself to pull A-1 out although A-2 is much easier on my ears. Or they could be easily added to the Blue Album.
|
|
|
Post by Beatle Bob on Oct 3, 2009 11:12:58 GMT -5
I would guess since they were recorded in the 90s-they wouldn't merit the same treatment-but if better technology can better restore John's voice especially on Free As a Bird, I would love to hear a remix. But even if they couldn't be improved, it would have been nice to have "Free As A Bird" and "Real Love" added to Past Masters. I can hardly ever get myself to pull A-1 out although A-2 is much easier on my ears. Or they could be easily added to the Blue Album. This got me thinking and today I'm gonna rip copies of the Past Masters and add FAAB and REAL LOVE to the end of disc #2. Regards, Beatle Bob
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Oct 3, 2009 12:12:38 GMT -5
But even if they couldn't be improved, it would have been nice to have "Free As A Bird" and "Real Love" added to Past Masters. I can hardly ever get myself to pull A-1 out although A-2 is much easier on my ears. Or they could be easily added to the Blue Album. This got me thinking and today I'm gonna rip copies of the Past Masters and add FAAB and REAL LOVE to the end of disc #2. Regards, Beatle Bob ...and both of you got me thinking-Apple could put out a remixed Red and Blue to feel the waters... but by all means include the two reunion cuts.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 3, 2009 12:45:07 GMT -5
This got me thinking and today I'm gonna rip copies of the Past Masters and add FAAB and REAL LOVE to the end of disc #2. Regards, Beatle Bob ...and both of you got me thinking-Apple could put out a remixed Red and Blue to feel the waters... but by all means include the two reunion cuts. BINGO! That is a great idea, mikev! You and many others here should be working at EMI/Capiol/Apple instead of most of those bums! ;D
|
|
lowbasso
A Hard Day's Knight
Posts: 2,776
|
Post by lowbasso on Oct 3, 2009 13:16:46 GMT -5
Ok. Universally, the critics and fans alike have given the remasters excellent reviews. It seems like the wait was worth it and Apple really did spare no expense in getting these albums remastered correctly. We hear more than we ever heard in these recordings. Things jump out at you not only in stereo, but in mono. Drums kick start songs and pound away driving songs. Paul's bass is now not a strain to discern. Vocals as clear as if they are singing in your living room. So here's the question.... would a remixed Beatles catalog be worth issuing? Is it necessary? Regards, Beatle Bob Having heard all the remasters now several times; through speakers on my home system, as well as in my car, and thru earplugs (I have the entire remastered catalogue now on my ipod), I am quite pleased with the result. I thought I would also want remixes done as well, but now I don't feel that would be necessary. Remixing requires a lot of choices be made by the powers in charge that alter significantly the sonic structure of the song, and those kind of decisions are usually made by the original producer and the artists involved in the project. The original producer (G. Martin) is now too old to participate in such an endeavor and more importantly, concerning The Beatles, two of the original artists are no longer with us to imput their desires into such a project. Yoko & Olivia should not be involved at all in such an endeavor as they cannot accurately substitute for their deceased spouses. And I seriously doubt whether Paul & Ringo would even want to put in the extensive time and effort required to remix the entire catalogue at this point in their lives. The YS songtrack album is the arguement in favor of remixing the catalogue. It was done without participation of the three (at the time) surviving Beatles and G. Martin. Most everyone seems to be happy with the results however, and the songs do sound much better on the album remixed. But that album still only accounted for a few songs out of the catalogue. And the purists will say it was done by outsiders, and cannot be considered genuine "Beatle" remixes. To remix the entire catalogue in this fashion would probably sound quite good (in fact, it may already have been done by EMI, if rumours are true), but it will always carry the stigma of not been done by the artists or original producer. The remasters we have now are still as the Beatles and G. Martin intended the music to be heard, only enhanced using current 21st century technology to give it more clarity. And, as audio technology continues to advance in the future, the remasters can continue to be enhanced in future decades for future generations yet still retain the original sonic balance The Beatles desired when the recordings were made. So, I think I would prefer to keep the remasters as my preference. Future remixes of the Beatles catalogue are now not all that desirable to me anymore. I didn't feel this way before I heard the remasters, interestingly enough! I also am a big fan of the LOVE album and mash-ups however. I would love to hear Giles Martin, or anyone else, take classic Beatles tracks and come up with more creative mash-ups in the future. I was fascinated by what was done for the Vegas show. It appears that Paul & Ringo were/are also fans of this alternative to their music as well. When expressing opinions on this subject I think it is also important to point out I am 54 years old, a first-generation Beatlefan, alive when the band was still active, and heard the original vinyl albums as they were released in the 60's. Our background experiences hearing The Beatles does affect our opinion on the above topic.
|
|
|
Post by pbirdchat on Oct 3, 2009 13:43:47 GMT -5
As I have stated in another thread, I too have enjoyed the remasters but after being teased with the possibilities in LOVE, I want to see remixes. NOT drastic mind you, just take the tracks that have been bounced, and separate them in a more pleasing stereo placement. For instance, on Revolution, the guitars are all on one speaker. On LOVE, the two guitars are panned left and right. More like you're hearing them live. Another one that would benefit is I Am The Walrus. The LOVE version puts the original mix to shame. I say PUT'EM OUT.
I've heard that most tracks are already remixed anyway.
|
|
|
Post by cheerdown67 on Oct 3, 2009 14:29:16 GMT -5
I do understand completley the argument of band input and original producers; but I feel, and this is merely my opinion, that Giles Martin is a perfect choice for re-mixing-I love his work on "Love" and i also loved his remastering on "Let It Roll"....
I am 42 years old and was an 80's child who got into the Beatles through my Mom who at the start of the 80's had felt that her youth had gone once John was gone...so my listening experience of the Beatles was stereo from the start...The Red And Blue albums were my first exposure...I loved them: I still do- I remember the coloured vinyl and the whole experience of listening to those LP's with the lyric sheet in hand....I would love those albums to be re-mixed and re-issued with both reunion singles attached.....
|
|
|
Post by wolfsblood on Oct 3, 2009 14:54:42 GMT -5
I'm not sure the exact difference between remastering and remixing. I think remastering only improves the sound quality of the song, but remixing does more than that. Remixing adds to or subtracts from the original vocals or instruments. Personally I'm not a huge fan of remixing classic rock albums. It took me a while to get used to the changes to the Doors and the Who CDs of the remixes. I'd prefer keeping the original nuances of the songs as we all heard them back in the day. Like Jim Morrison singing "She gets.... she gets....she gets...." instead of the 2006 remix where you hear "She gets high, she gets high" on Break On Through. Another example is that they screwed around with songs like Music Must Change and Guitar And Pen from the Who Are You remix from 1995. Also they took out the backwards guitar break in Magic Bus from Live At Leeds in the 1995 remix. The Let It Be Naked remix from 2003 sounded too digital. Using Pro Tools to "fly in" notes from other parts of the song to repair mistakes in the mix... it's a bunch of crap!
|
|
|
Post by mikev on Oct 3, 2009 15:38:56 GMT -5
Remixing per YS soundtrack basically went back to the original spools which were reduced, and added them back into separate tracks. Then the music was rebalanced for true stereo, but the bass,guitars, etc. weren't louder and lost vocals weren't inserted. But in a remix, they can be.
I think if everything is done the way it was for YS-it's not necessarily trading on sacred ground. Edit Be Naked-did tread. Best examples were the merging of two versions of I've Got a Feeling, and the Paul George and Linda 1970 harmonies were added to an otherwise stripped down Let it Be.
|
|
kc
Beatle Freak
Posts: 1,085
|
Post by kc on Oct 3, 2009 23:47:00 GMT -5
This got me thinking and today I'm gonna rip copies of the Past Masters and add FAAB and REAL LOVE to the end of disc #2. Regards, Beatle Bob ...and both of you got me thinking-Apple could put out a remixed Red and Blue to feel the waters... but by all means include the two reunion cuts. But the Blue Album is correctly titled "The Beatles 1967-1970." I can't see them renaming it "The Beatles 1967-1996," or "The Beatles 1967-1970 and 1995-1996." Including them on "Past Masters" would have been nice though.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 4, 2009 3:11:01 GMT -5
...and both of you got me thinking-Apple could put out a remixed Red and Blue to feel the waters... but by all means include the two reunion cuts. But the Blue Album is correctly titled "The Beatles 1967-1970." I can't see them renaming it "The Beatles 1967-1996," or "The Beatles 1967-1970 and 1995-1996." Including them on "Past Masters" would have been nice though. Maybe we need a new, comprehensive compilation built around the Red and Blue Albums, It would include, among many other possibilities, "I Saw Her Standing There," "It Won't Be Long," killer covers like "Twist And Shout," "Long Tall Sally," and "Roll Over Beethoven." It should have "I'm Down" and "She's A Woman." There needs to be much more Revolver on this new comp. There needs to be more White Album, particularly some of John's amazing "deep cuts." Then you could throw FAAB and RL at the end without messing up the name because the comp is new. This c.d. would be remixed as suggested. Now that would be a killer: the hits with more deep cuts thrown in and remixed too. While we are talking about remixing, wasn't it cool when George Martin brought far forward the electric guitar break in "Got To Get You Into My Life" for the 1976 Rock And Roll Music comp? That gave the song an added blast. That guitar break remains pretty low key in the original mix as found on Revolver. On 1976's RARM, I thought that my speakers would melt in that short burst of guitars. Now there was some remixing by a key participant when John, Paul, George and Ringo were all alive.
|
|
kc
Beatle Freak
Posts: 1,085
|
Post by kc on Oct 4, 2009 4:38:33 GMT -5
I've always liked the Red and Blue albums, but I would like to see them expanded. I still wouldn't put FAAB and RL on them though. I also like the idea of a new expansive compliation. A best of box set type release as so many other artists have. Put the two 90s songs on it. I've burnt my own version; it runs to six discs.
|
|
|
Post by Joe Karlosi on Oct 4, 2009 6:34:56 GMT -5
Maybe we need a new, comprehensive compilation built around the Red and Blue Albums, Why would we - the diehard Beatles fans, of all people - "need" that? We have all the albums, all the songs. Maybe that type of compilation would be helpful to more casual listeners who are looking for a sampling of the Beatles "best", but that's another thing... I've always felt that the Beatles are the one exception where it's necessary to own ALL their albums. I've always felt you can't successfully make a "BEATLES GREATEST HITS" backage without missing a lot of great songs. I'd say the "1" album came closest, but it still missed some great songs (I've always said it was a sin that PLEASE PLEASE ME was not included -- after all, it was the Beatles' FIRST #1 hit!).
|
|
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 Oct 4, 2009 7:00:29 GMT -5
It's easy to pick holes in the Red and Blue albums, but all I can say is it worked the oracle for me. Same as JSD, they were the first Beatles albums I listened to and they got me completely hooked. Job done.
Yes, there are some glaring omissions - espectially on '62-66' - and 'Revolver' is criminally under-represented, but a good case can be made for every song that is included.
|
|
|
Post by OldFred on Oct 4, 2009 8:21:43 GMT -5
I've always felt you can't successfully make a "BEATLES GREATEST HITS" backage without missing a lot of great songs. I'd say the "1" album came closest, but it still missed some great songs (I've always said it was a sin that PLEASE PLEASE ME was not included -- after all, it was the Beatles' FIRST #1 hit!). I agree, Joe. When I uploaded 'Beatles 1' to my iPod, I added 'Please Please Me' from the Capitol albums right after 'Love Me Do' and before 'From Me To You'. Since getting the Remasters, I've removed all the Beatles songs I had there before and replaced them with the Remaster versions in pretty much the same order, but adding a few other songs as well. I like that the Stereo 'Thank You Girl' on the Remastered 'Past Masters' has he same extra harmonica that's on 'The Beatles Second Album'. A pleasant surprise I got when I uploaded the Remasters to my iPod was that when playing them back, I had to lower the volume of the songs where before I had to crank them up a bit.
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Oct 4, 2009 9:42:42 GMT -5
. . . Why would we - the diehard Beatles fans, of all people need that? We have all the albums, all the songs . . . I agree. THAT would be merely a superfluous, merely do it for the money endeavor by Apple. If the remasters are as good as it gets, short of remixing, everything on the Red and Blue albums would not be better sounding, nor different. In this download age, all of us can create our own Reds and Blues. The casual fan can get a hold of these songs, too. No need for a special compilation. Even "invented" compilations can be created by "the people." We don't need Apple to give us The Guitar Songs or The Indian Songs or The Songs to Drive By or Songs to Put the Kids to Sleep or Songs Your Mother Should Know or Songs Without George and Ringo, or Let's Get High, etc. Now, this will sound odd to some, but something I'd like to have are the songs with the singing removed. I'd love to just hear the instruments. That's why some of the stereo songs are cool. With only the instruments coming out of one speaker, you often hear things that you wouldn't if the vocals were there. I'm sure a vocals only remix would be cool for others, too.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmos on Oct 4, 2009 10:14:03 GMT -5
Hey sayne, If you haven't already, you might want to track down "Stack-o-Tracks" by the Beach Boys. The whole LP has the vocals removed and it is a very interesting listen!
|
|
|
Post by sayne on Oct 4, 2009 10:37:48 GMT -5
Hey sayne, If you haven't already, you might want to track down "Stack-o-Tracks" by the Beach Boys. The whole LP has the vocals removed and it is a very interesting listen! Thanks! I'll look for it.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Oct 4, 2009 11:05:37 GMT -5
Maybe we need a new, comprehensive compilation built around the Red and Blue Albums, Why would we - the diehard Beatles fans, of all people - "need" that? We have all the albums, all the songs. Maybe that type of compilation would be helpful to more casual listeners who are looking for a sampling of the Beatles "best", but that's another thing... I've always felt that the Beatles are the one exception where it's necessary to own ALL their albums. I've always felt you can't successfully make a "BEATLES GREATEST HITS" backage without missing a lot of great songs. I'd say the "1" album came closest, but it still missed some great songs (I've always said it was a sin that PLEASE PLEASE ME was not included -- after all, it was the Beatles' FIRST #1 hit!). I meant "we" as in the whole record buying public. We are the world. ;D You are correct that us diehards would not need such a comp although, I'd still buy it and enjoy it and remember, my suggestion above would be all remixed which would bring it into the fold for us here. I don't like 1 as a comp even for Beatles' newbies. The Red and Blue are still the best but we all know the Red Album is not good value for its cost in the c.d. format. It is way too short for $30.00. I agree that we (again the music buying public) don't need anymore "Love Songs," "Beatles Ballads" or "Reel Music" sub-genre comps but a remixed, expanded comprehensive comp including the two Anthology songs would be welcomed it would seem with people wanting to explore The Beatles deeper and even to us diehards if the songs are remixed. Then again, the whole compact disc thing is dying and people will get to cherry pick soon enough on The Beatles' catalog so the albums themselves are going to be extinct. In ten years no one will be talking about Beatles For Sale or Abbey Road as younger fans will just select what songs they want. The whole album thing will be a quaint concept.
|
|
|
Post by winstonoboogie on Oct 4, 2009 21:02:46 GMT -5
. . . Why would we - the diehard Beatles fans, of all people need that? We have all the albums, all the songs . . . Even "invented" compilations can be created by "the people." We don't need Apple to give us The Guitar Songs or The Indian Songs or The Songs to Drive By or Songs to Put the Kids to Sleep or Songs Your Mother Should Know or Songs Without George and Ringo, or Let's Get High, etc. ;D
|
|
|
Post by stavros on Nov 3, 2009 15:27:11 GMT -5
It would be "icing on the cake" to get re-mixes. Love has some really great tracks on it. Other people have mentioned "Revolution" and "Walrus". I also like the new mix of "Eleanor Rigby" where the strings are prominent on the intro before the vocals come in. And this is the sort of thing that that could be done with re-mixes. Lengthened versions of "She's Leaving Home", "Golden Slumbers" etc, etc. A lot the Beatles songs were short and sweet. I'd like to hear a few lengthier tracks using the the original master tapes to expand them.
|
|
|
Post by John S. Damm on Nov 9, 2009 11:30:52 GMT -5
Hey, I tried to play the 2009 remastered Abbey Road on my car stereo and the breaks between songs were terrible! On "Something" it started one second into the song and did that at every song change! You can imagine how that would mar "Side 2" where the songs run together.
On my home stereo it played perfectly. I have a new car so the stereo is new but it is some nondescript factory brand. Still, this is 2009 and c.d. technology should be such that this should play smoothly on every c.d. player.
Do you folks think that the embedded album promo video is causing this interruption between every song? I haven't tried any other remasters in my car but I was having that problem on the "Side 1" AR songs where there are 1 to 2 second gaps between songs. Presumably this would happen on something like Revolver too.
The question is: why isn't my car stereo properly reading the breaks between songs on the new remasters? It stinks having to hit the "back" button to hear the first 1 or 2 seconds of each song.
Is anyone else having this problem?
|
|
|
Post by gripweed on Nov 9, 2009 21:47:05 GMT -5
I have played Abbey Road on my 2003 truck CD player and have had no problem.
|
|