|
Post by jeremygillespie on Jun 1, 2017 15:50:03 GMT -6
Just listened to a few and honestly don't care for the new mixes - especially the way the drums sound.
The low floor tom hits leading into the chorus' on Lucy ITSWD sound like some modern ringy DW Kit...
Just doesn't seem like the record I used to listen to for hours and hours on repeat as a child.
|
|
kcatthedog
Temp
Super Helpful Dude
Posts: 14,969
Member is Online
|
Post by kcatthedog on Jun 1, 2017 16:28:50 GMT -6
I think that is the question if George Martin were mixing the session today would they sound like Gile's mix or not ?
|
|
|
Post by Ward on Jun 2, 2017 7:54:42 GMT -6
Just listened to a few and honestly don't care for the new mixes - especially the way the drums sound. The low floor tom hits leading into the chorus' on Lucy ITSWD sound like some modern ringy DW Kit... Just doesn't seem like the record I used to listen to for hours and hours on repeat as a child. I should like to point out that my reference to loving the drums on SP was about the original mix.
|
|
|
Post by c0rtland on Jun 2, 2017 10:04:28 GMT -6
Just listened to a few and honestly don't care for the new mixes - especially the way the drums sound. The low floor tom hits leading into the chorus' on Lucy ITSWD sound like some modern ringy DW Kit... Just doesn't seem like the record I used to listen to for hours and hours on repeat as a child. of course it doesn't.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jun 2, 2017 14:44:05 GMT -6
Went back and forth between some various bits of original stereo versus new AFTER I listened through the new mix completely. I haven't read anything to know if they've explained logic of new panning placements. Everything sounds clearer. I'd guess it all got Plangent process as part of the multitrack re-sync, but don't know that. The work needed to understand every original EQ curve used to combat generation loss, and it's undoing, would be large. Some obvious, some guesswork. No idea if they kept detailed notes while making reduction mixes.
I had a lot more fun with the out takes version of the record, I'm always a sucker for a good bootleg. With the Beatles especially, this stuff is so in our heads it's refreshing to hear ANY alternate take of the material. We've probably all cut together much slicker end results from worse performances than the worst of their B-rolls.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jun 7, 2017 15:26:21 GMT -6
I keep getting stuck on "A Day In the Life." I just realized that slice of life thing that's all over this record was the main influence for my latest song.
If "Day in the Life" was the only song John Lennon had ever written, I think the power of this song alone would be enough to earn him the legacy of one of the greatest of all time. It may be sort of a Paul record for the most part, but John just completely steals the show and takes my breath away at this last statement.
Hell, I might even call it the greatest song of all time. Haha I love hyperbole. Especially when discussing the Beatles online.
|
|
|
Post by wiz on Jun 7, 2017 16:00:23 GMT -6
I keep getting stuck on "A Day In the Life." I just realized that slice of life thing that's all over this record was the main influence for my latest song. If "Day in the Life" was the only song John Lennon had ever written, I think the power of this song alone would be enough to earn him the legacy of one of the greatest of all time. It may be sort of a Paul record for the most part, but John just completely steals the show and takes my breath away at this last statement. Hell, I might even call it the greatest song of all time. Haha I love hyperbole. Especially when discussing the Beatles online. I have always loved that song, not a huge Beatles fan... but I love that song... till it gets to Pauls bit..... 8| cheers Wiz
|
|
|
Post by donr on Jun 7, 2017 20:16:08 GMT -6
I liked most of the remixes. Nice to hear the bottom free from disk mastering considerations. The bass sounds great. Hearing details formerly obscured. The vocal textures are exposed.
One tune I didn't like the mix on was "Good Morning." The Sounds Inc horns are subdued, and they were my favorite part of the original mix of the tune.
|
|
|
Post by johneppstein on Jun 8, 2017 4:26:36 GMT -6
Prior to 1968 stereo was an afterthought in pop music much like 5.1 is today. The idea that the grungy sound was an intentional aesthetic choice is BS from the '80s. When I visited EMI in 1969 they were thrilled to have begun using 8 track machines that would clean up the audio quality of multitrack projects. Sure, definitely, but I don't think that's really the issue. The issue is not whether The Beatles wouldn't have jumped to use the modern tech on the remix - of course they would! But the result would not have been the Sgt. Peppers that we know, the one that became an undisputed milestone in the history of 20th century popular music. A piece of art is in and of its time. In the case of recorded music the limitations are part of the "time" bit - those limitations force decisions and techniques that exert a strong influence over the finished piece of work. It affects the arrangement and in some cases even the finished composition of the music itself. It's not "an intentional aesthetic choice". It's something that had a strong effect on how the work evolved. It's part of what the work is.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jun 8, 2017 9:09:04 GMT -6
I liked most of the remixes. Nice to hear the bottom free from disk mastering considerations. The bass sounds great. Hearing details formerly obscured. The vocal textures are exposed. One tune I didn't like the mix on was "Good Morning." The Sounds Inc horns are subdued, and they were my favorite part of the original mix of the tune. I've hardly processed the new mix of "Good Morning", as I've been so enamored with the stripped down outtake version of it. Nice to hear the bass part so clearly.
|
|
|
Post by c0rtland on Jun 8, 2017 11:12:24 GMT -6
One apsect of their sound that I have really never noticed is how roomy the bass guitar sounds. It really blooms and sounds like you are in the room with the amp. All without being muddy. I'm sure some of this is bleed but I'm thinking there is more to it than that. Clearly it wasn't a di. Haha but I wonder if they had room mics for the bass. Maybe a figure 8 like a 4038? Or a u47 in fig 8 on the amp All I know is it's glorious.
|
|
|
Post by Guitar on Jun 8, 2017 11:24:12 GMT -6
One apsect of their sound that I have really never noticed is how roomy the bass guitar sounds. It really blooms and sounds like you are in the room with the amp. All without being muddy. I'm sure some of this is bleed but I'm thinking there is more to it than that. Clearly it wasn't a di. Haha but I wonder if they had room mics for the bass. Maybe a figure 8 like a 4038? Or a u47 in fig 8 on the amp All I know is it's glorious. I don't remember which album it was, but I was informed that the bass amp was miked, at least once, with an AKG C12 6 or 8 feet back. So certainly that type of mic technique could be a part of a sound like that.
|
|
|
Post by c0rtland on Jun 8, 2017 11:36:18 GMT -6
One apsect of their sound that I have really never noticed is how roomy the bass guitar sounds. It really blooms and sounds like you are in the room with the amp. All without being muddy. I'm sure some of this is bleed but I'm thinking there is more to it than that. Clearly it wasn't a di. Haha but I wonder if they had room mics for the bass. Maybe a figure 8 like a 4038? Or a u47 in fig 8 on the amp All I know is it's glorious. I don't remember which album it was, but I was informed that the bass amp was miked, at least once, with an AKG C12 6 or 8 feet back. So certainly that type of mic technique could be a part of a sound like that. that would do it. Better have a good room! Abbey road would probably work.... man. That is so obvious I'm almost ashamed of myself.
|
|
|
Post by jeremygillespie on Jun 8, 2017 12:18:16 GMT -6
In Geoff's book he said the C12 backed off the bass amp was his sound for a number of records.
Also said that Paul usually stayed after everybody left and laid down his bass parts after everything else was tracked.
|
|
|
Post by Bob Olhsson on Jun 8, 2017 17:33:27 GMT -6
The only valid comparison would be to the Parlophone mono version which was a flat cut. The Capitols were high-passed and smashed with a 670. The folks at EMI absolutely hated what they sounded like.
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Jun 11, 2017 12:42:07 GMT -6
I liked most of the remixes. Nice to hear the bottom free from disk mastering considerations. The bass sounds great. Hearing details formerly obscured. The vocal textures are exposed. One tune I didn't like the mix on was "Good Morning." The Sounds Inc horns are subdued, and they were my favorite part of the original mix of the tune. I've hardly processed the new mix of "Good Morning", as I've been so enamored with the stripped down outtake version of it. Nice to hear the bass part so clearly. Agree on the horns. Still having a lot of fun with the live takes, getting to know what they really played together. I've not heard the full album mono mix to know what I should be comparing against with regards to "in the spirit of the mono", only some 70's and 80's US pressings and the 1987 CD issue.
|
|