|
|
Post by EmRR on Sept 10, 2022 14:10:59 GMT -6
Are you saying there’s a US release mix with the bass down or that it’s mastered with less low end? Because the latter could be solved by turning the bass up on your receiver or just getting a copy of the UK edition. As to the former, I’ve never heard of anything like that. Not saying it couldn’t have happened or didn’t happen, just that I’ve not heard of it. There's a whole world of vinyl enthusiasts who can tell you which vinyl mastering and pressing is the best, for anything you want to hear. Pretty sure it was Bob O. here who said it was revelatory to finally hear a UK Pepper pressing. If you haven't priced that vinyl lately, you might be in for a shock, there's no "just buying it" unless you're loaded and spend all you're time looking and researching. There's things like the original UK mono Hendrix Are You Experienced which are a different superior mix, and no one's found the tape. I have a UK Axis Bold as Love that's a different stereo mix I've never heard anywhere else. All that to say, the cat's out of the bag on variation already, why not have some that's done on purpose versus dredging the endless accidental historical differences. Hell, on shuffle, I always like the Led Zeppelin rough mixes better than what came out, they're properly balanced, not "guitar to the front, bury the kick drum". I don't really care that parts are missing, again, hell, I never need to hear the original mixes again, I've heard them so much. As to the "cash grab" argument: the same Beatles collectors who already have 18 copies of this are always gonna buy the 19th. There's no argument they should branch out and try other music, they're not gonna. Streaming doesn't care, they're just playing songs, if one version is played it docks the streams on the other, net zero. Maybe Apple gets a higher return on new versus legacy rights holders. The Beatles, I'm so well versed in all the bootleg alt takes/mixes that've been out there for 40 years, the "official original" is just one more version, not necessarily so interesting if you've heard a lot of the unofficial alts. They're probably not gonna give us the multi-tracks anytime soon, so I dig the official alt perspectives. Along those lines, they would do just as well issuing just the alt versions that have been coming with the remixes in expanded editions, you can look at the remixes of originals as bonuses relative to that, almost. |
|
|
|
Post by bchurch on Sept 10, 2022 14:42:01 GMT -6
Once you get the vinyl corksniffers in the mix, hoo boy.
I thought I spent a lot on MY gear and I’m MIXING. I had this “vinyl guy” come to my place to optimize my turntable and setup and the sorts of numbers that the vinyl cognoscenti put into their rigs would make some mastering engineers blush.
To be fair, it’s not like he was a douche bag to me or anything. I was almost apologetic about my sub thousand dollar turntable and he was quick to say, “no, no, this is a great piece and should serve any vinyl enthusiast well.“ i’m sure he spent more on his cork slip mat or RCA cables, but I digress.
|
|
|
|
Post by drumsound on Sept 10, 2022 15:43:29 GMT -6
i really don‘t need a new mix of revolver. the original is perfect for me. even the 2009 remasters are good enough. Yeah, I came to Revolver late, but I still think it is a lesson in creative compression, and the studio as a creative tool. I said this in Purple-land, I'd prefer that the release the multitracks. I'd pay for a hi rez download of what Giles et al are working off of. I'd like to have a folder of the 4-track as final to be mixed, ie What Geoff Emerick worked off of. AND the ones used for the new mixes. Everyone and their uncle has a studio of some sort, and that would be cool as shit! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 10, 2022 15:43:41 GMT -6
Are you saying there’s a US release mix with the bass down or that it’s mastered with less low end? Because the latter could be solved by turning the bass up on your receiver or just getting a copy of the UK edition. As to the former, I’ve never heard of anything like that. Not saying it couldn’t have happened or didn’t happen, just that I’ve not heard of it. There's a whole world of vinyl enthusiasts who can tell you which vinyl mastering and pressing is the best, for anything you want to hear. Pretty sure it was Bob O. here who said it was revelatory to finally hear a UK Pepper pressing. If you haven't priced that vinyl lately, you might be in for a shock, there's no "just buying it" unless you're loaded and spend all you're time looking and researching. There's things like the original UK mono Hendrix Are You Experienced which are a different superior mix, and no one's found the tape. I have a UK Axis Bold as Love that's a different stereo mix I've never heard anywhere else. All that to say, the cat's out of the bag on variation already, why not have some that's done on purpose versus dredging the endless accidental historical differences. Hell, on shuffle, I always like the Led Zeppelin rough mixes better than what came out, they're properly balanced, not "guitar to the front, bury the kick drum". I don't really care that parts are missing, again, hell, I never need to hear the original mixes again, I've heard them so much. As to the "cash grab" argument: the same Beatles collectors who already have 18 copies of this are always gonna buy the 19th. There's no argument they should branch out and try other music, they're not gonna. Streaming doesn't care, they're just playing songs, if one version is played it docks the streams on the other, net zero. Maybe Apple gets a higher return on new versus legacy rights holders. The Beatles, I'm so well versed in all the bootleg alt takes/mixes that've been out there for 40 years, the "official original" is just one more version, not necessarily so interesting if you've heard a lot of the unofficial alts. They're probably not gonna give us the multi-tracks anytime soon, so I dig the official alt perspectives. Along those lines, they would do just as well issuing just the alt versions that have been coming with the remixes in expanded editions, you can look at the remixes of originals as bonuses relative to that, almost. Also sometimes the 45s of 60s songs sound awesome and the lp versions you can get on the cds are wimpy. Then you have Bathory where the CDs of early material were made from insanely deteriorated tapes and the LPs (and needledrop boots) have fat sound even with all the lofi artifacts. |
|
|
|
Post by sirthought on Sept 10, 2022 20:19:28 GMT -6
There is most certainly a difference in what your vinyl album is made of that makes a difference in the sound. Some pressings were just cheaper and less quality.
But I haven't spun a vinyl record (or a CD) in years. The process for mastering to these mediums is just different than if we're talking about a digital download or streaming. And I think if a remix can be visited with that in mind, and it's Giles Martin, then sure why not take a listen.
Re-issues are partially about renewing copyright claims. Rights holder will want to release the same material now and then so they can get around copyright laws that might otherwise expire.
I fully supported having the Beatles catalog redone of vinyl too! To be honest I enjoyed some of the mono mixes better than the stereo, but it's fun to listen to music, so why not take a chance on getting to know the stereo versions. Now that they might not be thinking about vinyl limitations, I think new opportunities exist.
When I bought Beach Boys stereo versions for the first time, I really wanted to hear the mono again, and decided I prefer that. But everyone is different.
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,107 
|
Post by ericn on Sept 10, 2022 20:23:49 GMT -6
Sorry, everyone… I am still just all kinds of whipped up about this for some reason. Maybe it’s because some of my favorite records of all time sound novel because of the limitations in their recording, not in spite of them. low-fi isn’t by any means bad, or wrong (I’m not saying the Beatles are low-fi either - but they were most certainly limited). The unfortunate part of doing what it is we all here do, be it professionally or otherwise, is that we intersect with a jaundiced industry that thinks about profit first, quality and integrity much less. I’m not a Beatles megauberfan, but listening to my dad’s vinyl copy of Sgt Peppers at the age of four definitely formed something in me. To me, meaning this is my sole opinion, that album sounds as it was intended to. There is nothing that needs to be “fixed“. It’s that limping husk of “the old way” of marketing and selling music that creates these sort of needless re-re-re-release iterations - all so a dead chomo’s estate can squeeze another million or two out of a record that sounded great over a half century ago. We aren’t digitally remastering Picasso. Or the Statue of David. Timeless is timeless. Leave it alone. I’ll Venmo y’all for the therapy appointment. To add to this, the money that labels are spending on these reissue shenanigans once upon a time could have gone towards artist development. Ah, if only. Benny it’s 2022 we don’t need no stinking artist development, we have auto tune 😁 |
|
|
|
Post by bchurch on Sept 11, 2022 6:51:06 GMT -6
Not only that, we decided that egregious auto tune errors were now simply “the sound“.
My apartment in New York overlooks a park where the local youth like to congregate and smoke tons of weed. It’s eye opening to listen to their music- it really puts your finger on the pulse. And, just as my dad said about the droning drop chords and existential whining that I came of age listening to, I think it’s awful. Rhyming about shawty in triplets with auto tune set to “broken robot” over a distorted 808 sample, mixed by someone with their thumbs in their ears.
But anyhoo…
|
|
|
|
Post by Hudsonic on Sept 15, 2022 14:51:09 GMT -6
Don't think Giles Martin is a great mixer and don't think he should be turned loose with this classic material. Family name recognition is the only reason he is allowed to do it. Why is he allowed to do it?
|
|
|
|
Post by smashlord on Sept 17, 2022 9:44:45 GMT -6
I just don't get why this is necessary? The original sounds fine, great even. When I first got an RS124 and put a guitar through it I was excited because it sounded like "Revolver".
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2022 13:48:17 GMT -6
Not only that, we decided that egregious auto tune errors were now simply “the sound“. My apartment in New York overlooks a park where the local youth like to congregate and smoke tons of weed. It’s eye opening to listen to their music- it really puts your finger on the pulse. And, just as my dad said about the droning drop chords and existential whining that I came of age listening to, I think it’s awful. Rhyming about shawty in triplets with auto tune set to “broken robot” over a distorted 808 sample, mixed by someone with their thumbs in their ears. But anyhoo… Yes the same with Distressor, Decapitator, Avid Low-fi, and Valhalla Vintage Verb imo. |
|
|
|
Post by bchurch on Sept 17, 2022 15:31:02 GMT -6
Don't think Giles Martin is a great mixer and don't think he should be turned loose with this classic material. Family name recognition is the only reason he is allowed to do it. Why is he allowed to do it? I hadn't even considered that end of it. It was just "so and so is remixing it." Last I checked, being good at playing with all these fancy boxes of knobs and lights isn't genetic. Eh, well.... people are gonna do what people are gonna do. Putting out a new version doesn't mean I can't listen to my old one. See? I'm getting really good at this whole "letting it go" thing!  |
|
|
|
Post by theshea on Sept 19, 2022 5:26:05 GMT -6
don‘t know how much giles martin is responsable for mixing as in this article they speak about abbey road engineer sam okell doing the tape transfer, recreating the mono/stereomixes for sgt. pepper and so on. maybe its the same with revolver. www.soundonsound.com/techniques/inside-track-sgt-peppers-lonely-hearts-club-band?ampbut anyway, what they did with the album „love“, the creative mixing of sounds and parts from different songs, that was interesting in places but as i said before: i am not interested in a new revolver mix as i personally think there‘s nothing wrong with the original ones. but hey, emi has to keep the legend alive for the new generations. |
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Sept 19, 2022 8:10:08 GMT -6
|
|
ericn
Temp
Balance Engineer
Posts: 16,107
|
Post by ericn on Sept 19, 2022 10:03:03 GMT -6
Are you saying there’s a US release mix with the bass down or that it’s mastered with less low end? Because the latter could be solved by turning the bass up on your receiver or just getting a copy of the UK edition. As to the former, I’ve never heard of anything like that. Not saying it couldn’t have happened or didn’t happen, just that I’ve not heard of it. There's a whole world of vinyl enthusiasts who can tell you which vinyl mastering and pressing is the best, for anything you want to hear. Pretty sure it was Bob O. here who said it was revelatory to finally hear a UK Pepper pressing. If you haven't priced that vinyl lately, you might be in for a shock, there's no "just buying it" unless you're loaded and spend all you're time looking and researching. There's things like the original UK mono Hendrix Are You Experienced which are a different superior mix, and no one's found the tape. I have a UK Axis Bold as Love that's a different stereo mix I've never heard anywhere else. All that to say, the cat's out of the bag on variation already, why not have some that's done on purpose versus dredging the endless accidental historical differences. Hell, on shuffle, I always like the Led Zeppelin rough mixes better than what came out, they're properly balanced, not "guitar to the front, bury the kick drum". I don't really care that parts are missing, again, hell, I never need to hear the original mixes again, I've heard them so much. As to the "cash grab" argument: the same Beatles collectors who already have 18 copies of this are always gonna buy the 19th. There's no argument they should branch out and try other music, they're not gonna. Streaming doesn't care, they're just playing songs, if one version is played it docks the streams on the other, net zero. Maybe Apple gets a higher return on new versus legacy rights holders. The Beatles, I'm so well versed in all the bootleg alt takes/mixes that've been out there for 40 years, the "official original" is just one more version, not necessarily so interesting if you've heard a lot of the unofficial alts. They're probably not gonna give us the multi-tracks anytime soon, so I dig the official alt perspectives. Along those lines, they would do just as well issuing just the alt versions that have been coming with the remixes in expanded editions, you can look at the remixes of originals as bonuses relative to that, almost. Agreed unless they bought a Mobile Fidelity box set, then they are to far indebt to consider the 19th release🤪 |
|
|
|
Post by kcatthedog on Oct 5, 2022 15:09:39 GMT -6
Likely an interesting interview!
|
|
|
|
Post by smashlord on Oct 29, 2022 17:50:38 GMT -6
Thoughts now that this has been out?
Seems largely unnecessary to me and there are ALOT of weird phase artifacts just making me dizzy (piano at the top of "Good Day Sunshine").
|
|
|
|
Post by stratboy on Oct 30, 2022 19:07:29 GMT -6
Drove from VA to TN today and listened to Beatles the whole way on Apple Music. The new mixes really stand out to me in some good ways and some bad.
Good, IMO, is if you want to hear the instruments sound modern (drums especially), the mixes are great for that. If you want to hear modern stereo soundstage, good for that, too.
Bad, IMO, are those occasional moments where an element jumps out, is very different from the original, and made me wonder who the heck made THAT decision? Would George Martin, Geoff E or for that matter any of the original production team (including the Beatles themselves) have done it that way if they had the means? To me, that’s where a line got crossed. I respect Giles Martin’s right to do it and understand his wanting to make those choices, but at the moment I heard that snare hit, or harmonium or whatever jump out at me, I would have preferred an esthetic that tried to duplicate the original intent as much as possible, just with modern sound.
It made me want to listen to the mono mixes again. I’ll do that tomorrow.
YMMV
All that said, I’m looking forward to listening to the new Revolver, one of my most favorite Beatles albums.
|
|
|
|
Post by EmRR on Oct 31, 2022 12:47:14 GMT -6
Love it. A different clearer view. It's even more apparent how smashed the original drums are. Anything I thought out of balance seemed like the right call when comparing against the original mono and stereo mixes. Most times something that seemed diminished was really damn close to where it was originally, just that everything is so much clearer now that other elements stand out in ways they didn't. Use of stereo to open up the arrangements is great. I know the orig so well, I never wanted/needed to listen to it (like so many classic albums), now there's a new version to catch new angles from. Diminishes nothing. The orig mono seems kinda sad in comparison. Don't compare! Same can be said for the other way 'round!
And....it's still really mainly about the alt takes and work mixes, the remix is a bonus.
|
|
|
|
Post by bossanova on Oct 31, 2022 14:18:37 GMT -6
We listened to it last night. Other than the drums being louder we stopped noticing differences as much after the first few songs. The clarity on some of the vocals (Elenore Rigby) is incredible. The distortion on some of the mono mixes stands out way more as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by sirthought on Oct 31, 2022 20:27:37 GMT -6
If you are A/B'ing them, the stereo does have several differences, but nothing is so dramatic that on a casual listen you'd ask WTF?
Still, I find the mono mixes on several of these projects to feel so very comfortable. I should love the stereo, right? Well, somehow I feel such an affinity for the mono that I wonder why I don't attempt mono mixing ever.
The two volumes of outtakes are really a special experience for me. Overall this is a great product and collection. Unless you are a huge Beatles geek like me, you might not want anything more than the main album. And who am I to suggest whether you buy mono or stereo? But for geeks like me, these collections are so informative and can fill a whole afternoon.
Loved the past reissue projects and love this one too.
I wonder if Peter Jackson's studio will be making a retail version of the separation software? I'd imagine a lot of rights' holders will be licking their chops to get a hold of it and make their own stereo reissues.
|
|
|
|
Post by svart on Nov 1, 2022 8:02:33 GMT -6
Once you get the vinyl corksniffers in the mix, hoo boy. I thought I spent a lot on MY gear and I’m MIXING. I had this “vinyl guy” come to my place to optimize my turntable and setup and the sorts of numbers that the vinyl cognoscenti put into their rigs would make some mastering engineers blush. To be fair, it’s not like he was a douche bag to me or anything. I was almost apologetic about my sub thousand dollar turntable and he was quick to say, “no, no, this is a great piece and should serve any vinyl enthusiast well.“ i’m sure he spent more on his cork slip mat or RCA cables, but I digress. I was perusing the local thrift store looking for a record player. I hadn't really cared what I got as long as it was something older (read: decently built and not overpriced plastic) and came across a B&O turntable for 20$. I bought it. It was heavy, chassis and internals made of metal. I took it apart, cleaned it and recapped the electronics. The bad part is that the stylus is a cartridge type that you can't buy anymore. At least the tip was in perfect condition. But here's the thing. It sounds like a turntable. I have a few records both new and old. I'm not a big vinyl fan, but it's interesting to listen through the stacks of records from my parents and grandparents. I have some first-edition Beatles, Doors, and others that are in decent shape. Anyway, I think it sounds fine. A friend is a much bigger vinyl fan and has spent some money on his rig. He listened to mine and told me there were big deficiencies and that the turntable I have is mediocre at best. Online reviews are everywhere from "great" to "playskool sounding" depending on the reviewer. But here's the thing.. I listened to my friend's system and honestly I can't tell the difference. It's not obvious where the thousands of dollars have gone. Beatles sound like Beatles, Nirvana sounds like Nirvana, etc. Recordings I know very well sound just about identical on my <1000$ system as it does on his 20K+system. If the difference is not absolutely obvious to a casual listener, then can it be said there is any difference at all? |
|
|
|
Post by Martin John Butler on Nov 1, 2022 9:56:58 GMT -6
I'm surprised svart. I have a sweet stereo system. My friend had a $30,000 system. His system slayed my very nice system. One sounds very pleasing, the other sounds like i'm in the studio listening to the band.
|
|
