Beatles in Mono. - Page 15

Ron,
   Check out the mono mix of "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" again.  There is a flanging effect applied to Lennon's vocal that is absent from the stereo version. "She's Leaving Home" is also faster and (as a result) pitched slightly higher compared to the stereo. 

As for your question, the only thing the stereo set is missing is the mono mixes.  For songs where there is no proper contemporaneous stereo mix (such as "Please Please Me", "P.S. I Love You", "She Loves You", "Its Only a Northern Song", "You Know My Name [Look up the Number]" and the "no tambourine/Ringo on drums" version of 'Love Me Do"), they are presented in mono on the stereo releases.  The only instance of reprocessed/"fake" stereo left in the catalog is "I Am the Walrus" which goes from real to fake stereo a couple of minutes in when the radio voice overdubs start and stays that way until the end of the track.  The mono "Love Me Do" on Past Masters (as well as on Mono Masters) is actually from a needle drop as there is no tape source left to use as a master.

Ron,
The mono set is missing Abbey Road and Let It Be because by that time, all mixing of The Beatles recordings were finally done in stereo only. The final mixing sessions were all stereo, no mono anymore. Yellow Submarine had a mono version, but it was just a fold-down of the stereo, so its mix was not unique, except for the four tracks in the mono master set that was meant for a never released EP.
The stereo set includes some mono cuts as mentions, as those songs are not available in stereo, and the goal was to have every Beatles song in the stereo set, even if there is only a mono version of a particular song.  The mono set contains only mono mixes that were done specifically for mono LPs, with mono singles compiled onto Mono Masters 2CD.  The idea is that all the Beatles were present during these mono mixes and the stereo mixes only had George Martin and the recording engineers and tape operators present.   Basically, the Beatles approved the mono mix and then based on that mono mix, they created a stereo mix after that on their own without the fab four. I don't mean to conclude that the fab four were not audiophiles, but if you know their history they were always looking for new sounds, not necessarily the best cleanest sounds. They also listened to their day's work on an acetate, to play at home, usually on a home record player. I don't recall that they had exceptional hi-fi equipment at home. Perhaps they had conventional record players at home so they can hear how the average fan would be listening to it. They may have also felt that they can trust George Martin and the engineers to make the stereo version appeal to the more audiophile fans. As I said, they were more concerned with a sound than it's quality. Like the guitars on songs like Rain, She Said She Said or the mellotron sound on Strawberry Fields, or changing the sound on Eric Claptons guitar solo on While My Guitar Gently Weeps to sounds more Beatle-y.

As for re-doing the stereo mixes, if Paul felt they could be better by re-mixing them, he would have said to re-mix them. However, the recordings belong to EMI and it becomes a political battle. Remixing has been done in cases such as the Beatles Love, or the Yellow Submarine Songtrack, Let It Be Naked and Anthology. All the original albums have maintained their original mixes. I think for historical reasons, the Beatles albums mixes should be kept the way they are, warts and all. It shows how amazing these recordings were made with outdated equipment. If you go back and re-mix everything, the magic of that is all gone. What made the Beatles so amazing was a combination of the songwriting, the musicianship and the recording techniques employed at the time. What makes Sgt. Pepper so amazing is the fact that they used only four-track tape machines to create everything.  It took over 20 years before the Beatles recordings were remastered, and IMO, they did it right this time.
I'll post another thread later with my comparison of Sgt. Pepper mono vs. stereo, some of which was mentioned by previous posters, but there are more differences.

Anthony and all,

Very much appreciate the replies you are giving here.  
I am enjoying the read.  

Truthfully, I am not especially diggin' the mono mixes.
Yes, I do hear nuances in the songs that I never did
before.  However, they just sound too flat to me.  I
suppose I have been spoiled by the stereo versions
for most of my life.

That being said, I don't regret buying the boxed set.
I do think there is something to be said about the
historical significance of this set.  Then, there is the
simple fact that I am a Beatles fan and collector of
their music.   If they released a boxed set of all their
music played backwards I would probably consider 
it as well.

Because this is a Home Theater Forum, I thought I'd toss in one more thought.

As Anthony has posted above, the original intent of the pre-Abbey Road and Let It Be releases was Mono. As I understand it from how Anthony explained it, it is the originally intended version they; John, Paul, George and Ringo approved. And they didn't mind how the engineers went about doing stereo.

It's like OAR. If the director had intended a 4:3 aspect ratio, and wanted it released that way. Then that was how it was released originally. Now that everyone has a 16:9 monitor (Or the emerging stereo sound systems in the home back in the 60's, early 70's), the engineers went back to the source materials and revealed more image on the sides to take advantage of the new format. (Or as it was back in the 60's, the home stereo sound systems)

And then since stereo became the defacto standard, we all got used the stereo versions. So it seems that little distinction is what is missing in everyone's understanding of the Mono mix release. It was limited originally because it was meant for the uber fan who understood this.

The Mono set is not strictly about audiophile quality, which it is. It's about preserving a release in it's originally intended aspect ratio, if you will accept that analogy. 

Edited by Nelson Au - 10/25/09 at 10:07am

The listening environment is very important too. I don't think mono or stereo sound particularly good with headphones-- perhaps that's just not how music was heard at the time. I'd stick with the stereo versions on an iPod or for car listening. But give the Mono's another chance in a proper set-up at home.

 The real differences come out between Sgt. Pepper and the White Album. The rest of the Albums from Revolver on back may have a benefit of not hearing some tracks that are wide stereo with vocals right, instruments left, etc.

Here is a rough breakdown of the Sgt. Pepper mono tracks and how they differ from the stereo versions:

Sgt Pepper (opening track) - the brass band comes in very clean and up front, as opposed to the stereo, which is panned slightly and an echo sound as if they are playing in a hall, while the mono is clean and dry sounding. The lead guitar where Paul sings "the singer is going to sing a song..." stand outs in front with the vocal, not so much in the stereo.
With A Little Help From My Friends - the segue is not as clean as the stereo version, Ringo's vocal and some of the instruments have slight phasing throughout the song.
Lucy In The Sky With Diamonds - phasing throughout the song
Fixing A Hole - rhythm section is up front with the vocals, fade out has additional vocals just as it ends
She's Leaving Home - plays faster than the stereo version
Within You Without You - George's count-in after the orchestral bridge (1-2-3-4-1-2...) is missing before the vocals. The laughter at the end of the song is slightly different.
Lovely Rita - the vocal effects heard in the songs ending section are pushed back behind the piano, not like the stereo where they are up front on one side, piano on the other.
Good morning Good Morning - animal sounds at the end are slightly different, segue to Reprise sounds like a tape drag where the chicken cluck is located.
Sgt. Pepper Reprise - audience sounds in the start are different, vocal chatter is more noticeable. Rousing finish vocals by Paul proclaiming "the greatest band of all time"

The white album has many differences, but the most noticeable ones are:
Back In The USSR - jet plane noises in slightly different parts of the song
Blackbird - different bird sounds
Why Don't We Do It In The Road - hand claps missing in the intro (?)
Helter Skelter - sound effects once hidden in the stereo version are not up front. Song does not fade back in at the end, less production at the end of the song, so the drumming section comes out louder.
Honey Pie - slightly longer guitar solo by John revealing more of a jazz style guitar playing.

Yes, that's a great way to put it. And that's exactly as I have heard it explained for years now.

Also, the lead vocal on Don't Pass Me By sounds considerably different (sped/pitched up) and the fiddle outro is less polished.

Of note circa 1968, I believe the mono mixes of Revolution 9 and Hey Jude are fold-downs of the stereo mixes, although a lot of heavy eq moves were performed to get the mono Hey Jude to sound the way they wanted it.

Also as a bit of trivia, the stereo mix of The Inner Light was created in early 1970 (almost two years after the mono mix and single release on the B-Side of Lady Madonna), but never appeared anywhere until a UK compilation in 1981.  The US "Rarities" album from 1980 included the mono mix with liner notes about no known stereo version ever being released, and then the authentic stereo mix showed up less than a year later.  It did not show up in a US release until the "Past Masters Volume 2" CD in the late '80s.

Regards,

All this renewed discussion of the mono mixes is getting me anxious. My set arrived on Saturday, and my wife has already hidden it, since it's a Christmas gift.

Anyone know how to re-shrink wrap a CD package?

[carly simon]An-ti-ci-pay-ay-tion...[/carly simon]

I've been waiting since the week they first came out, but fortunately it is for a birthday present for this Thursday.  In the meantime, I've got my mono records and needle drops to keep me warm. :) 

The early albums sound really great in "mono remastered", although Sgt. Pepper is fun to hear in a giant mono wall-o-sound as well.  The song that really stood out for me on SPLHCB was "Lucy" - John's vocals are just so phased that it really gives a psychedelic feeling that is just missing when the phase is stripped away from his voice in the stereo versions. For me it was the most dramatic "mono version" effect.

The stereo effects in the early and early-middle albums were always distracting to me - particularly on "Rubber Soul" (which I've always preferred over "Revolver", I know, blasphemy!) ... especially when I'm listening on a stereo and not sitting in one place.  I wouldn't quite say "revelatory", but certainly "better than I've ever heard it."

Rubber Soul has always been my favorite Beatles album. Love Revolver too, but whenever someone has asked me which is my favorite, I have never hesitated saying Rubber Soul. It's one of the greatest albums anyone has ever made. I love how it bridges the periods in Beatle history from that garage rock/pop sound (Hard Day's Night, Beatles For Sale) with the more experimental album-as-art period (Sgt. Pepper, Magical Mystery, parts of Revolver). To me, it embodies all of those sounds and is the quintessential Beatles record.

 It also happens to include the greatest song of all time.  In My Life.

I love Rubber Soul, too. It's really the first true cohesive "album", as opposed to just a collection of songs, by the group, IMO.

Listening to the stereo remasters has put me on a Beatles kick. I've been re-watching The Anthology DVD's, which I have not viewed since they were originally released. I also pulled out Love -- I do not think I ever listened to the DVD-Audio disc before. Next is the DVD-R dub of The Compleat Beatles documentary I made from my VHS copy. The video quality is lacking,  but this still my favorite Beatles documentary. It's a shame this title was never released on DVD.

I've mentioned this before...but I am thrilled by the DVD-A of Love.  Does that make me a bad person?    Are Beatles purists disturbed by that release? 

The audio fidelity is absolutely exciting and makes me wonder how good the original master tapes can sound in lossless audio.  And I'm not averse to the idea of surround mixes. 

 Scott- 

When you get to watch the Anthology DVD set, I think you'll enjoy Paul's recounting of how Rubber Soul's album art happened. I always enjoy that disc during that middle portion of their Beatles career.

I happen to find a used copy of The Compleat Beatles on Laserdisc in great condition many years ago. I think that's a very well done documentary too.

While the purist in me may have struggled with the concept, I quickly got over it and did really enjoy the DVD-A mixes on Love. As you stated, Mike, the audio fidelity of the lossless mix is incredible. The mixes themselves are certainly a different take on the music, but if you accept them for what George Martin and son were trying to accomplish, they are quite enjoyable listening.

Nelson, Rubber Soul should be covered in the next part of my Anthology viewing. Thanks for the heads up on the cover art discussion.

Unfortunately, I never bought into laserdiscs, so I cannot use LD as a source for The Compleat Beatles.  I do vividly recall buying the VHS copy, though -- it was the first pre-recorded VHS tape I ever purchased back in the mid-1980's. Also, this tape was my main driver for figuring out a way to "back up" VHS to DVD-R, as I assume this excellent documentary will never be released in a newer home video format.

Wasting time?

I recently received by Mono Box Set and am enjoying the music of my high school and early college years, in mono yet!   I decided to opt for redundancy and get the stereo box set as well.  It should be delivered soon.

My question is whether burning CD-Rs using Windows Media lossless is worthwhile.  I thought at first that making CD-R backups would be a good way to prevent damage to the original discs.  However, I can fit the first four CDs in lossless format onto one CD-R.   Is that an indication that something has been lost?  Or is it just the small file size of mono recordings?  If I'm not burning the full disc, I really shouldn't bother.  I've already burned the discs to my iPod for casual listening in the car.  The CD-Rs would be for more critical listening on my two channel system. 

Lossless compression means that no information is lost, so in theory it should sound identical. However, do you have the ability to play those lossless compression files on your critical listening system?

I burned CD-R backups for listening in my car (I never take original CD's in the car), but my car system cannot even play MP3, so it was standard redbook CD format in my case. Luckily, the shorter length of most of the albums allows me to combine two albums per CD-R. I have to cut out a couple of songs for The White Album, but I cannot stand Revolution #9, which gets me most of the way there just by cutting that song.

Some lossless formats can reduce the file size by 50% or more. The first few Beatles albums are very short IIRC, and two could fit onto a single 80 minute CD-R without compression, so it's not surprising you could fit four onto one CD-R especially if you are using a really efficient lossless codec.

But as Scott did, I also burned archival copies because quite frankly I want to keep these originals in as pristine shape as possible for years to come. I used exactaudiocopy to burn a bit-for-bit image onto my computer and then purchased some Taiyo-Yuden CD-Rs (under the Maxell Pro label at a local Frys) to make my copies. When I have the time, money, and inclination I'll probably spring for some Mitsui MAM gold CD-Rs (considered the best in the industry, Taiyo-Yudens are second) and re-burn everything.

I do not quite agree with not doing remixes of the stereo versions. These albums are so short, they could easily have put out CDs with both the original stereo mixes and with new stereo mixes which rectify the horrible "vocals one side; instruments the other side". The sounds themselves would still be original; only the mixing would be new. And you would still have the original mixes on the same CD.

I do not yet have any of the new CDs. I prefer mono for most of the early albums. I really don't want to plunk down $200+ for yet more Beatles stuff (I, too have been collecting for many years). I really wish the mono mixes had been released singly. For now, I making do with CDs I made of my mono LPs.


Edited by David_B_K - 11/4/09 at 8:03am

That would be a noble thing to do, remixes alongside the original mixes. but the recording studios are not so noble, as are the publishing companies. They would probably insist that both sets of same songs be charged as twice the royalties.  It would lend further proof as to why the mono and stereo where not simply put onto one disc. They could have easily done this with the first 9 albums, but they didn't. There is some element of Beatles legal department that would not give consumers two Beatles albums for the price of one, and of course very few of the mainstream public would pay even for a single Beatles album at twice the price.
As for re-mixing,  one of the problems is some of the session tapes are missing from the vaults.It may not be possible to remix all the albums. I would say that they would definitely try to remix the later albums, but the early albums will likely not get remixed. Abbey Road and Sgt. Pepper. White album uncertain, it would be a challenge to remix Revolution 9.

Here's a new toy for the Beatles fan who wants everything: an Apple-shaped USB stick that contains the entire stereo remastered catalog (in both 320kbps MP3 and 44.1 Khz 24 bit FLAC, including all the artwork, liner notes, and mini-documentaries):

http://beatles.fanfire.com/cgi-bin/WebObjects/Store.woa/wa/product?sourceCode=BEAWEB&sku=BEA48315

It looks cool, but I keep telling myself that for $279, I don't need it...

- Steve

The 24-bit part is interesting. Seems like we're being offered 16/44 cd, then we get 24/44 USB, leading up to (presumably) 24/96 on BD. The ultimate triple-dip in record time! :) Then there's vinyl...hopefully

On another note, I've really been enjoying losslessly streaming the monos to my bedside Grace internet radio. Sounds wonderful at the low volumes I ask of it, and such a radio (minus the streaming ;) ) is probably what they had in mind as a likely destination for the mixes.
Edited by Jack Gilvey - 11/5/09 at 9:20am

 Sorry...double.

Edited by Jack Gilvey - 11/5/09 at 9:20am