Beatles Remastering Entire Catalog

[Trancetones]

Remastering before online distribution. Anyone want to venture a guess if this will be an improvement over the previous digital mastering?

"In a written statement submitted earlier this month, Aspinall told the High Court that surviving members Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr, and the widows of John Lennon (Yoko Ono) and George Harrison (Olivia Harrison) had been taking a wait-and-see approach to Web-based distribution. They decided that before jumping on the online bandwagon--which accounted for a whopping $1.1 billion last year, they wanted to digitally polish the 40-year-old songs. (The Beatles have been famously technology-shy, having waited until the mid-1980s to release their albums on CD.)"


"We're remastering the whole Beatles catalog, just to make it sound brighter and better and getting proper booklets to go with each of the packages," Aspinall explained. "I think it would be wrong to offer downloads of the old masters when I am making new masters. It would be better to wait and try to do them both simultaneously so that you then get publicity of the new masters and the downloading, rather than just doing it ad hoc."

[Philip S Bova]

Brighter and better?

psb

[borau]

I hope this is just someones bad idea of a joke.

Brighter? The Beatles? Maybe mr. Aspinall should go check his hearing.

[C/G]

Hopefully not louder and crappier.

[Naren]

Originally Posted by borau

I hope this is just someones bad idea of a joke.

Brighter? The Beatles? Maybe mr. Aspinall should go check his hearing.

No kidding. I hope Aspinall is not being literal when he claims he is doing the mastering. He was very hands-on with the Anthology video, so who knows?

Some of the existing CD masters are too bright already. As it is, I'm tempted to take some of my CDs, record analog out to 24 bit and do a little, ahem, remastering of my own. I don't mean just the Beatles but lots of stuff. Many of the remastered mixes do not seem to mesh well.

BTW, I think this will be the third remastering of the Beatles' catalog. IIRC, there was the initial mastering for the first CDs and then a George Martin-supervised remastering, and now this one.

This would be another great topic for Ken Scott to add his two cents (pence).

-Naren

[Rodney Gene]

I have wanted to start a 'remastered' rant post for a long time...but I never want to disrespect any of the mastering engineers who do the remastering...
I have no idea what they have to start with..so?

But... every single remastered disc I have bought this past 5 years sounds really bad. The worst 'sounding' is the Journey Escape remaster...and... it has dropouts (not complete but volume swells)!! No kidding. Not just my copy!

I think remastering is a supurb idea...if the integrity is kept pure...and who knows..maybe it is? Maybe some of these mastering heads are really and truly doing thier best work?

Either way...it doesn't sound pleasant here.

Whoever gets the honor of remastering the Beatles should have a fun time doing it!!

Much Respect,

[paterno]

If they were smart, they'd turn it over to the Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs guys -- who, from what i understand, are the only 'outside' company to ever put out versions of any Beatles record. i've got an 'original master recording' version of Abbey Road around here somewhere. I own several of their re-issues, and they take it seriously. My MFSL 'OMR' version of Queen's 'News of the World', is one of my most treasured CD's, from a sonic perspective.

Although it'll never happen, one can always wish...

JP

[vernier]

Scooped mids, digital verb, L2 ...can't wait!

[shady656]

Originally Posted by vernier

Scooped mids, digital verb, L2 ...can't wait!

Who knows, If were real lucky, they'll reamp all of the guitars and throw them through ampfarm, and not to mention the magic of soundreplacer.

[Kiwiburger]

This is one of the saddest things i've heard in a long time. Yeah, I guess the people who own this catelog have lost their hearing by now. I hope they haven't lost their sense of taste and smell as well.

Shit.

Now future generations will have now idea how good The Beatles actually sounded.

Time for the adult diapers I think.

[Jules]

Fab gear!

[pingu]

They should allow loudcd's.com to do the mastering.

[Philip S Bova]

Originally Posted by vernier

Scooped mids, digital verb, L2 ...can't wait!

...and if we're lucky they'll also hit the ADCs real hard and clip 'em.

[scott petito]

I just hope they don't do a Let it be Naked job on it.... everyone was so proud of the no noise they used... oy it sucked the life out....managed to make a beatles record sound flat and lifeless ....the beatles on vinyl in mono had more 3D than most modern recordings...

cheers
SP

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by scott petito

I just hope they don't do a Let it be Naked job on it.... everyone was so proud of the no noise they used... oy it sucked the life out....managed to make a beatles record sound flat and lifeless ....the beatles on vinyl in mono had more 3D than most modern recordings...

cheers
SP

Not to mention the fact that those analog tapes have probably all been played far too many times for their own good. I strongly suspect they are way past the degradation spiral. I've seen overplayed old analog tapes where you can see through the oxide.

[shangoe]

Originally Posted by vernier

Scooped mids, digital verb, L2 ...can't wait!

yeeaa, i want them to CLIP the Shit ot ouf it with a Lavry Gold!!!

[NeveMaster]

Originally Posted by bob katz

Not to mention the fact that those analog tapes have probably all been played far too many times for their own good. I strongly suspect they are way past the degradation spiral. I've seen overplayed old analog tapes where you can see through the oxide.

Those old tapes were made from Whale Blubber and every other part of a whale. You dont have to bake tapes like that, Unlike now the syntheticness of a tape needs to be baked after 25 passes

[T_R_S]

AFIK all the tapes were transfered onto Sony DASH when they re-mixed for CD releases.
There are so many versions of some of the early stuff it's hard to keep tabs on it.
It's a marketing ploy IMO to get people to buy the downloads. I still have all my old LP's and only about 5 CD's it did not get to buy the CD's and won't get to buy the downloads at all. I would guess it probably aimed at new fans and a few die hards.
Remixing for Downloads is for marketing not for sonic quality

[Sirocco]

beatles records play FINE on stereo systems as they are!!

[RadioMoo]

Originally Posted by Sirocco

beatles records play FINE on stereo systems as they are!!

D i g i t a l - B a s e d 1 9 Y e a r - O l d P r o d u c e r / M i x E n g i n e e r

He would know!

[llarena]

Just listen my old beatles LPs for the last months. I find them great as they did in the 60´s. They´ve got Some of the best pop-rock albums and we must do NOTHING with them.

[drmmrboy]

Originally Posted by Colin Gaucher

Hopefully not louder and crappier.

I'll put my money here.
How can it not end up this way? I think the stuff sounds quite fine. Where can it progress to from here?

That's a big task. Put yourself in that seat. Then ask, "what can I do to improve upon this?"

[drmmrboy]

1st Young pup: How do I get that Nu Beatles sound?
2nd Young pup: C1000, crank the high end, and squeeze the shizz out of it.. Sounds just like the record.. Whoops, I mean sounds just like the Nu CD.

[Jerry Tubb]

Compare the colorized version of "The Maltese Falcon"to the original black and white release of this 1941 classic Bogart film. The colorized version looks absolutely ridiculous. The colorizing trend was a futile attempt to make great classic films more appealling to a younger audience and stimulate sales.

Maybe the Beatles catalog should be left as it is, not remixed for maximum download impact.

However I would love to hear a high resolution DVD-A or SACD version of "Sgt Peppers" in 5.1 and/or 2.0.

Always thought it would be interesting to have the Beatles multitracks available as HD DAW files, so you could mix your own versions... just fors kicks

JT

[llarena]

Originally Posted by Jerry Tubb

However I would love to hear a high resolution DVD-A or SACD version of "Sgt Peppers" in 5.1 and/or 2.0.

Always thought it would be interesting to have the Beatles multitracks available as HD DAW files, so you could mix your own versions... just fors kicks

JT

Me too but that´s another question.

[Jerry Tubb]

Originally Posted by RadioMoo

If you're really serious, try to find a vinyl pressing of this put out by Mobile Fidelity in 1981. This is high-res.

Yikes! I just checked eBay, they're going for about $600.

Original 1967 pressing going for about $100.

JT

[jbuntz]

Allegedly the band always pushed for brighter sounds. I'm going to be pissed if I see one snare hit clipped. I remember looking at sgt peppers mixes and nothing ever gets close to digital zero. Nothing. If it's normalized, whatever. I don't want to hear the beatles with L2 and clipping.

[astronmr20]

Keep in mind that if this is to be re-mastered specifically for "digital distrobution," they will be eventually converted/ compressed to MP3 or AAC for the itunes buyer.

The more dynamic range somehtng seems to have before going to mp3 (i.e. "natural" sounding, with light-handed mastering), the more trouble it has when it goes to MP3. then it will be played on an Ipod, then an FM transmitter in an icar play.... well... unfortunately, to make it work with all the other music on an Ipod...

It might need to be "squeezed."


A sad day. Dumbing down some of the greatest recordings on earth so they sound "good" on ipods.


And no one will notice folks... 'cept us. *sigh*

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by RadioMoo

Without looking, I'd say that price is for the Ultra High Quality pressing. All the albums were released as a box set; the going rate for all thirteen records wouldn't be that much, if the seller's got any integrity.

That tape deck is a SCULLY 280 modified for preview. Not exactly the most flutter-free transport ever invented. Hope they fixed the capstan motor bearings.

BK

[bob katz]

Originally Posted by astronmr20

The more dynamic range somehtng seems to have before going to mp3 (i.e. "natural" sounding, with light-handed mastering), the more trouble it has when it goes to MP3.

I disagree strongly with that statement. Dynamic range and MP3 get along particularly well. The less dense and more "open" the material, the easier the time the Codec has to encode. Coders such as MP3 were DESIGNED to work with normal material, and fall apart with dense and especially distorted material. An MP3 of an uncompressed Beethoven symphony can sound particularly nice, but of a clipped Brittany Spears will fall completely apart.