Stereo Classics' Beatles Mixes (Lovely Rita)

[gaizoku]

Thank you.

[RalseiDeltarune]

This sounds great. What program do you use? What's your remastering process?

[dmh84]

Thanks--can't wait to hear!

[Gilbeatle]

Thank you !!!!

[El_Garnatí]

I have a friend who is obsessed with dynamic range (DR).
He says that almost all the records that are made now and the policy of the record labels is to lower the DR and increase bass and drums. That all sounds very bad.
Could someone explain to me about it?
Thanks.

[etidel]

Thanks for your work Garrett and welcome back

I hope you'll consider all the Beatles albums !

[Garrett]

Firstly, thank you all.

Reup for the four previous mixes:

hxxps://we.tl/t-1USUsxfGg4

(FYI: For No One has been slightly remastered from the previous download, as I needed to add a boost around the 11kHz region, subtle but definitely noticeable difference.)

NEW SERIES

IMPORTANT: I have completely updated the Please Please Me album remaster. Please replace the previous download with this version. I did not add enough high-end, I have fixed this and the result should sound much smoother! Download the official unoffical Definitive Masters for Please Please Me:

UPDATED PLEASE PLEASE ME REMASTER: hxxps://we.tl/t-X7qd5HMnzF

I will be starting a new series called the Definitive Masters. I'll be remastering all the Beatles albums in chronological order. I am very excited by this prospect as it's been something I've wanted to take on for a while as the Beatles on digital are not presented correctly at all, in my opinion.

Here are a couple of remasters I have thrown together so you have an idea of what is in store:

It Won't Be Long: hxxps://drive.google.com/file/d/1Ya9Prqy2CW3agd2McIjw9zPUpJvue0fl/view?usp=sharing (Source: 2009 Stereo)

Oh Darling: hxxps://drive.google.com/file/d/1z8WW_2VDoxoYPrJBZq0Z4Mn2-LXhxli1/view?usp=share_link (Source: 1987 CD)

With The Beatles should be out in the next week or so.

This sounds great. What program do you use? What's your remastering process?

I use iZotope RX10 for EQ. The only other program I use is Adobe Audition 3.0 for mixing. My process is simple: obsession. I have tried and failed at remastering so many times in the past, but my ears have gotten better. I have attempted nearly a thousand different songs at this point.

I use the EQ match in iZotope quite frequently, for two reasons. One, it gives me a representation of what the EQ in the song looks like, so I can see if there is a dip somewhere or maybe the high end has been rolled off too much. Two, I EQ match a lot. What I always try to do is find the best digital source I can find (the mastering (EQ) of the source I use isn't really too important as I'll be changing it anyway, what is important is that there is no compression, digital futzing, lossless etc.) Then, I try to find a good needledrop of whatever I am trying to master. Vinyl is nearly always mastered better than digital for songs that were recorded on tape. That's why many people believe vinyl sounds better, it's really just the superior mastering.

I simply start by EQ matching the vinyl to the digital. Many times I get a good result which I only have to minorly tweak. Other times I have to make a lot of changes. I just use the EQ in iZotope and keep messing around until I find what's best. My set-up allows me to switch from monitors to headphones and back immediately, which is incredibly helpful in mitigating ear fatigue.

As I've gotten more experience, I began to notice patterns. Of course you can't approach each song the same, but you can analyze the file and see something you've seen before, like how the highs and lows are rolled off, or that the mids at 3kHz are just too loud.

This is all completely unconventional, but it gets me the result I want. I have never been one to explain things very well, so just ask me any questions if you want.

[Bianju]

I have a friend who is obsessed with dynamic range (DR).
He says that almost all the records that are made now and the policy of the record labels is to lower the DR and increase bass and drums. That all sounds very bad.
Could someone explain to me about it?
Thanks.

Dynamic range is the difference between the quietest point and loudest point of a recording. Compression (what your friend is referring to) is about making the quiet parts of a recording much louder and has the effect of removing timbral overtones to sort of "simplify" the sound. This is, in reality, a process that's been used in everything except classical and folk music for a long time now. The Beatles music as presented on the original record releases is not as dynamic as the original master tapes are, and even those tapes were probably a fair bit less dynamic than the original live performance. Over-compression can definitely be a problem when you remove the dynamic range from a recording entirely. But it's not a new issue. Old Motown 45s are some of the most compressed, crackly-sounding recordings in music history, and the overwhelming drums and bass are just a consistent thing that companies do to drive up the loudness of a track (especially when radio play basically exists for public venues nowadays; you are much more likely to hear the hook through drums, bass, and vocals than anything else over loudspeakers). Yes, these things can absolutely be overdone, but somebody who knows what they're doing can make a compressed, bottom-heavy and drum-centric track sound amazing.

Hope this gives you what you were looking for!

[Garrett]

Also, just a little more ear candy:

[BTL1210]

Thank you for the first "Definitive Master" Garrett - AWESOME ....