Entertainment For Lively Minds
The Remasters - stereo or mono?
Posted by billyous on 9 September 2009 - 1:30pm.
I intend buying one of the box-sets, but I can't decide which - stereo or mono? I'd appreciate any advice on pros/cons of either and, ultimately, which version I should go for. The only way I could possibly decide is by having access to both before purchase -- but that's unlikely to happen. I also don't have the funds for both, so that's a non-starter. Thanks in advance.
ps. I appreciate that there are a few people on here who are suffering Beatlemania fatigue. I would respectfully request that they ignore this post.
- More from billyous.
- Login or register to post comments
-
50/50
I've got both, and I'd be hard pushed to decide which to get if I could only have one.
The Mono sounds great - especially on the early albums - I Saw Her Standing there just sounds so vibrant and full of energy. The pacakaging in the mono is also excellent - each CD replicates the vinyl release - down to the EMITEX slip on the early albums, and the 'Fool' designed inner on Sgt Pepper.
However, for true value for money, the stereo is the choice one- you get all the albums, plus past masters and documentary DVD(haven't watched this yet). Each album is in a Digipak with a booklet with the original notes and contemporary notes.
But....
...only the mono mixes were approved by The Beatles, and when you hear the stereo versions of the early albums you can understand why people are going for the mono remasters; the stereo versions still have vocals in one side, instruments in the other and frankly they sound a bit silly. IIRC the Beatles Red LPs had the same problem, whereas the Blue album didn't, probably because by 67-70 they took more care with stereo.
So you want the early albums in mono, and the later ones in stereo.
.
Danny Baker's just realised this, live on air - and he paid for the boxset himself...
Danny Baker
has just sold a Beatles mono box. My mum has been listening to him doing his a\b comparisons and ordered one from the Amazon.
So my mum now has better Beatles CD than me
And so turns the karmic wheel ...
possibly.
Thing is,
who on earth wants to listen to stuff in mono, even if that was the way they were intended?
I've just taken delivery of my super deluxe stereo box set, but I'm waiting to go home before I crack it open...
Well
Well, having splashed out for the stereo box, you would say that wouldn't you?
Listen to Rubber Soul in super separation stereo and get back to me!
Me, for one.
Completely deaf in my right ear after surgery two years back. I'd love them in mono.
Thanks guys
I appreciate all your comments. I've just been re-reading Bob Lefsetz's reviews of both and he makes a case for each -- but doesn't say which he prefers!! Aaaargh!!
Been pondering this myself
Worth noting is the fact that the mono box doesn't include Abbey Road or Let It Be, as they were originally mastered in stereo, so it won't give you a complete set. You'd need to shell out a further £20 or so to match the stereo box set, so quite a price difference.
Based on a - so far - very limited dipping in
Mono Box plus Abbey Road & Let It Be is the way to go. (You will also get the Help! & Rubber Soul original stereo mixes in the Mono Box).
It's the more expensive option but I think it is worth while.
I'd agree...
Heard both sets, went for the mono box + AR & LIB.
Me too
After much deliberation, I've gone for the mono set from Amazon.
Went into London today to
Went into London today to get one or two of the Beatles' re-issues, and came back with a Billy Fury LP.....in mono.
I think I got it wrong.
I'd Say Stereo...
... but then, I'm not remotely interested in what the band's original intention might have been - I just want whatever sounds best to me.
Agree
I bought the stereo boxset today
Been listening
to A/B comparisons here...
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=TheOneBeatle&view=videos&start=60
I'm not sure if they are THE remasters, but the mono sounds much better to my ears (through headphones)
Surely the individual mono CDs will follow
Does anyone really think the much-troubled EMI will keep the mono discs only available as a "limited edition" box set? If the demand is there they'll keep selling them as the box and then ship them individually with yet another huge campaign; "hear The Beatles as The Beatles intended you to"...
Personally, I've gone for the stereo. I can't justify the ridiculous price of the mono - twenty quid a disc, most with less than 40 minutes music?
Hopefully so...
...I appreciate all parties want to make some money on this, but this type of exclusive-only approach just promotes piracy - not everyone can spend that amount of money on a boxset - why should they be denied a legitimate chance to buy individual mono CDs?
It was
nice to see HMV had lined up racks of copies of Ian Mcdonald's REVOLUTION IN THE HEAD next to all the CD box sets this afternoon. I hope it sells another few hundred thousand copies on the back of all this, like it deserves to.
Dunno
Being a born ditherer I have just ordered Abbey Rd, and hope to hear it this w/e against my old CD. But really, for me, question is what will best reveal the kind of care that went into them and is so well documented here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00mkgzx/Record_Producers_The_Exten...
see e.g. point about 1/2 hr in where he explains how he stitched two recordings of Strawberry Fields together, at 2 different pitches and 2 different tempi ...
... and around 1hr 10 m in where the truly gorgeous tracks of Come Together are picked apart-and that'slistening on an iPod-looking forward to playing again at home.
Both
I picked up both earlier today. They really do sound different. The Mono is full of energy and sounds more wholesome. The Stereo is a little bit louder, and sounds a bit more like 'today'. Both packaging jobs are superb but the Mono is really really !@#$ing cool box. LP miniature replica. http://cl516.blogspot.com/2009/09/beatles-in-mono.html
I said I'd like it in stereo!
I said I'd like it in stereo!
Or mono.
Just not Ono.
Oh, no...