beatlegdb.com

The 62-66 set sounds great in Atmos/Spatial Audio. Really good. Revolver was the same way, with the Atmos mix of She Said way better than that odd stereo mix. Maybe this is the target format now?

What a weird choice to include Roll Over Beethoven and You Really Got A Hold On Me!

I like the sets, they are different, and to me that's what remixes are for. If I want the mixes to sound like the originals, well I have them also.

Michael

Nine-0-Nine wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2023 12:38 am What a weird choice to include Roll Over Beethoven and You Really Got A Hold On Me!

Roll over Beethoven was a big hit for them
it was number one in Australia, and number 2 in Canada and Norway. and it has George on lead vocals

But yes, You've really got a hold on me was a strange and wasted choice..They could have put on "Money" as a better idea, or better still put on "do you want to know a secret", especially as it features George on lead vocals.and it was number 2 in the USA and New Zealand

Seems they missed some guitar on Old Brown Shoe at 34 and 41 seconds. Maybe they were trying to get the sound of the mono mix.

She Loves You does sound like it's taken from a record. Probably because the edits weren't so obvious on the original issues. I have to confess I never, ever noticed the edits until I heard Past Masters, and did a huge double take.

We all knew they weren't going to just replicate the sound of the originals. It's been that way since 2017. I just consider these to be the equivalent of shopping for foreign albums or bootlegs in the 80s. I was always happy to find a weird mix with something different or new in it. So this is like six albums worth.

Also, the catalogue has always been a mess going right back to the 60s. In those days you had Capitol going nuts with reverb and butchering albums. In the seventies the mono albums vanished and you could only hear the stereo mixes. In the 80s, you got the mono back for the first four but lost the stereo versions, and furthermore got two stereo albums completely replaced. So nothing has changed much! If anything, it'll just give new fans the opportunity to have some fun and hunt down all the different incarnations. The Beatles seem to be bullet proof and no matter how their music is presented it somehow finds new fans. I first heard it through a terrible mono tv speaker, sped up 5 or 6% and chopped up and re-arranged... that was the Al Brodax cartoon series but it didn't stop me becoming an instant Beatlemaniac!

I don't really understand why people are complaining that these new mixes don't sound like the originals.

I quite like the new mixes and find them much easier to listen to than the old stereo mixes. Don't know if it's just because I'm younger but when I see people complaining about them replacing history or whatever I just imagine people thinking Paul and Ringo are bashing down their doors and stealing all their old cds and records, and pulling it all off of streaming services.

PaulsBrokenaGlass wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2023 8:33 am I don't really understand why people are complaining that these new mixes don't sound like the originals.

I quite like the new mixes and find them much easier to listen to than the old stereo mixes. Don't know if it's just because I'm younger but when I see people complaining about them replacing history or whatever I just imagine people thinking Paul and Ringo are bashing down their doors and stealing all their old cds and records, and pulling it all off of streaming services.

The original mixes will always be around. I mean, there's a bit of a novelty factor to these new remixes but in 10-15 years time the bloom will have gone off the rose and it'll be back to the originals. It was the same with the 1987 remixes, critics were going mad over them at the time but you'd be hard pressed to find someone now who prefers them. Or Let It Be Naked, who still remembers that (I know I have that cd, but have only ever heard it once)?

The trouble with remixes (and I know this all too well from experience) is that they date REALLY quickly. It's like the Star Wars movies that George Lucas tinkered with and now it looks really silly having cheap 90s visual FX in movies made in the 70s. Or colourised movies in the 80s or pseudo-stereo in the 70s.

Expect in 20 years time a new series of re-issues of "untouched, from the original mastertapes". If you wait long enough, everything old becomes new again.

PaulsBrokenaGlass wrote: ↑Sat Nov 11, 2023 8:33 am I don't really understand why people are complaining that these new mixes don't sound like the originals.

I quite like the new mixes and find them much easier to listen to than the old stereo mixes. Don't know if it's just because I'm younger but when I see people complaining about them replacing history or whatever I just imagine people thinking Paul and Ringo are bashing down their doors and stealing all their old cds and records, and pulling it all off of streaming services.

when u listen to the old stereo mixes via loudspeakers, then they r ok. it was annoying listening to it with headphones and in the car where the loudspeakers are far from each other. voices close to you, intruments far far away or vice versa. not very convenient.

Is it me or is the new "Can't Buy Me Love" only using one vocal track? The other track is barely there.

Are these mistakes/changes software bugs or software features? I'm cornfused.