nice article - The Beatles Mono Mania

[SEAWOLF97]

.
great engineer interviews , stereo vs. mono in the studio ..etc.

http://recordcollectornews.com/2014/...es-mono-mania/


NEW MONO RELEASES MADE FROM THE ANALOG MASTERS REVISIT THE ORIGINAL MIXES



An Interview With Abbey Road Studios Engineer, Ken Scott

Interesting exchange :

Q: ‘The Beatles In Mono’ vinyl box set is out in September.


A: For me, that’s the way we listened to them. We never ever, as we were recording, listened to it in stereo. Always mono. We only listened to it on one Altec (604) speaker. They weren’t that good and we had to struggle to get things sounding good through those speakers but we knew if we got them sounding good through those speakers they would sound amazing anywhere else.

[Wagner]

.
great engineer interviews , stereo vs. mono in the studio ..etc.

http://recordcollectornews.com/2014/...es-mono-mania/


NEW MONO RELEASES MADE FROM THE ANALOG MASTERS REVISIT THE ORIGINAL MIXES



An Interview With Abbey Road Studios Engineer, Ken Scott

Interesting exchange :

Q: ‘The Beatles In Mono’ vinyl box set is out in September.


A: For me, that’s the way we listened to them. We never ever, as we were recording, listened to it in stereo. Always mono. We only listened to it on one Altec (604) speaker. They weren’t that good and we had to struggle to get things sounding good through those speakers but we knew if we got them sounding good through those speakers they would sound amazing anywhere else.

Uh, ok. Now I am already skeptical after reading THAT statement (about 604s). ALMOST every analog talking head including the dip Fremer* will invariably refer back to Parlophone original pressings, both MONO and STEREO as being still the most desirable sonically (eventually), IN GENERAL as in OVERALL (caps are intended to prevent the speed readers and skimmers from putting words in my mouth and starting the unwarranted "argument").

Hey fellas, playback, monitoring and mixing of all of these were originally done on 604s (as you have stated), and according to many (and y'all) they were the best. So what's there to fix if these tapes are in great shape as well as sound great (to them) and only need minimal tweeking? The 604s did no harm then, what's with the crying now? (unless they're not coming clean about this project?)

I just pray they haven't ham fisted these like the last go round. Guess a lot of guys fancy themselves as the "5th Beatle".

All discussions of this nature are 90% subjective. I leave 10% open as there most certainly are many totally shit pressings floating around of everything under the Sun, Beatles included.

I own many many Beatles recordings on vinyl from original Palophones, Capitols, both complete STEREO catalogs on CD (the roll front box) as well as the complete catalog "Limited Edition" on domestic (U.S.A.) vinyl from 1995. I also own the Beatles on MONO CD boxed set as well as many Japanese and German pressings. I own some Mo-Fi pressings but not the famed "box". I've listened to and own a LOT of Beatles records is the point here.

All of the above have their strengths and weaknesses. None are perfect and OVERALL, in GENERAL as in MOST OF THE TIME I am perfectly happy with listening to any of the contemporary pressings (contemporary to when the Beatles were still together and or alive). It's all about the strength of the material for me, better than "good" to excellent pressings are icing on the cake.

I am extremely pleased that this latest Beatles box promises to be all sourced from original analog tape and not working masters or anything involving digital manipulation. I have wanted this for a long time. When Classic Records released "Kind of Blue" and Sony started it's massive "Legacy" projects back in the '90s I would always request "The Beatles" on those cards included which asked "what would you like to see us do next".

My main interest was in having fresh clean copies to play, not judge in a beauty pageant. Copies well made and on high quality vinyl. I am old enough that more than a few of my originals were played many times over on a Magnavox portable equipped with a Garrard changer and a ceramic cartridge. Although I was extremely fastidious with my records as a youth, they have a LOT of mileage on them and I would welcome nice new ones!

But I would PREFER that they be the same recordings I knew and loved when first released and hopefully with minimal manipulations by folks, many of whom were barely alive at the time they were on the charts.

Case in point? What was done to "Yellow Submarine" when it was re-mastered and re-issued as the "Yellow Submarine Song Book". I welcomed the inclusion of the additional tracks and it is one hell of a LOUD and CLEAR (to the point your ears bleed) pressing but the music is at times barely recognizable. They've shifted everything thing around in the MIX so that it barely resembles the piece as constructed by John, Paul, George, Ringo and George Martin, at times.

To me, that's too much change. I understand the reasoning behind it, and I will have to admit I wish they had then what we have now (well some of it anyway) but those recordings as originally released to the world represent a very complex process and set of circumstances which I feel are best served preserved intact.

I personally feel that George Martin's part in it all is an inseparable part of how these records sounded and should be preserved as much as possible, warts and all. I can accept changes happily within reason, such as improvements in clarity and focus resulting from technological advances in tape machines and cutting. But here's hoping it's not overdone (musical changes).

One of the multitude of reasons the Beatles are so appealing to me is the fact that this music occurred when it did. I guess what I am trying to say is that you can over do things and some of that period effect is lost. I think this is an important aspect of it and should be preserved regardless the fact that possibly a majority of today's current consumers of this materiel may not even be aware of it aesthetically speaking. With no exception that I can think of, all of my pre bar code era Beatles material is sonically superior to those with bar codes (all Capitol Beatles material with bar codes on the covers are sourced from a digital working source or masters). Still, none of them "bad" enough to destroy or diminish the MUSICAL soundness of their work. I recognize, these are purely subjective opinions.

So, I am going to buy this box with the hope and belief that they're telling the story accurately and haven't fooled around with things too much. The STEREO re-issues from 2012 were a disappointment overall as were the CDs, for me anyway. A great deal of hype, a LOT of defective pressings and mediocre packaging all things considered.

And still the bobbing heads, as they always do (for the most part) proclaimed them "the best" there's ever been. The only way to really HEAR the Beatles. The Beatles as they were MEANT to be heard and all that sort of horse shit.

When a re-issue project of this magnitude is done and you have to sift through them to find "well this re-mastered track is better than the original track, but the original track on......is better than this re-mastered track" I REALLY don't see the accomplishment.

Track to track consistency didn't exist with the originals, nor was it the case from album to album, so if it's going to be that way with the re-issue/re-masterings then why screw with them at all? (never mind the discussions on originals from various countries, Capitol's use of the reverb etc).

I am just hoping that what they have done here is essentially what was done with "Kind of Blue" and any differences between these and a clean first pressings (or better yet, master tapes) will be subtle. As subtle as the differences heard between the same recording pressed at two different (but well done) pressing facilities. The proverbial "hot stamper" sort of difference.

What I find interesting is that so far we've been spared the inevitable debate over tape noise with these; leave it in or take it out? Then again interestingly enough even period Beatles records did not exhibit a great deal of tape hiss. I personally prefer that they leave it in if it was there originally on all recordings not just the Beatles.

I also love the fact that after FOUR full blown, digitally enhanced New and IMPROVED Beatles catalog re-issues since 1995 (not even counting Toshiba's efforts and those done elsewhere overseas) here we are in September 2014.........and the word is yet again? "These are the closest you'll get to the master tape!" (talk about a broken record )

Here's hoping they did a tasteful job.

*Well, it appears that my pal, wind bag ass Michael Fremer was the first to put up a review at Amazon. Wasn't there this morning. He's gushing (predictably; he gets his new records "free"). He mentions his fantastic originals, and of course now the MONO CDs suck in comparison, but he spared me the track by track comparison (at least for now with the Amazon review). He's giddy (but that's because they let him watch)

If you had any doubt, there's none now, cause Michael say's:

"This box set is as close to hearing the master tapes as you can get and I heard one of the master tapes! In many ways these reissues are better than mono originals and I have them all. These are the ones I'll be playing....M.F. editor, analogplanet dot com"

(note how this wind bag leaves himself the open; he does mention those originals he's constantly bragging on (for DECADES) as he tones down his rhetoric about the new ones; "in many ways". There'll be a column soon describing the "many ways" HIS, Michael Fremer's Beatles records are the absolutely positively bestest sounding Beatles records in the universe! ) Always does!

[SEAWOLF97]

I tend to believe the engineer who was there.
Didn't see any anti-Altec agenda. Just an opinion.

Mikey is part of the reason that I quit Sterophile mag.
He & Dud and a couple of others add up to a big 0 (zero) ..shills.
JA was the only one worth reading, and he doesn't write much.

[Wagner]

I tend to believe the engineer who was there.
Didn't see any anti-Altec agenda. Just an opinion.

Mikey is part of the reason that I quit Sterophile mag.
He & Dud and a couple of others add up to a big 0 (zero) ..shills.
JA was the only one worth reading, and he doesn't write much.

I didn't say they had an agenda, but when you say (and I quote loosely) "if we can make it sound good on these, it'll sound good on anything"

To me that's a not so subtle knock on the speaker

I'll try to find the article I read yesterday; of course now that it's been 24 hours or so anything you type in related to Beatles and MONO yields the billion redundant press releases and folks selling the record

He made a few comments about not being very excited over 604s (one of them did anyway) Think it was N.Y. Times article. I mean it's not like I'm upset over it, but the 604 is as much a part of those early records as 6BQ5s and Vox amplifiers. Clearly not as big a part I don't think but still a part of the whole nonetheless, so I mean why knock them at all?

Here you go; just in time for Christmas:
http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/20...ype=blogs&_r=0

[Wagner]

Two decent video clips:
http://www.elusivedisc.com/The-Beatl...fo/CAPLP63379/

[Wagner]

I tend to believe the engineer who was there.
Didn't see any anti-Altec agenda. Just an opinion.

Mikey is part of the reason that I quit Sterophile mag.
He & Dud and a couple of others add up to a big 0 (zero) ..shills.
JA was the only one worth reading, and he doesn't write much.

Lot of interesting material at this guy's site, LOTS!

Don't agree with everything but he's correct on many points; the biggest kick I get out of reading his stuff is that he makes me laugh.

Regarding Fremer:

http://www.high-endaudio.com/RR-FREMER-A.html

http://www.high-endaudio.com/RR-FREMER.html

[SEAWOLF97]

I didn't say they had an agenda, but when you say (and I quote loosely) "if we can make it sound good on these, it'll sound good on anything"

To me that's a not so subtle knock on the speaker

NO reason to quote loosely .... take the direct quote from the story

"For me, that’s the way we listened to them. We never ever, as we were recording, listened to it in stereo. Always mono. We only listened to it on one Altec (604) speaker. They weren’t that good and we had to struggle to get things sounding good through those speakers but we knew if we got them sounding good through those speakers they would sound amazing anywhere else."

you can double check my accuracy on the story's link that I posted earlier.

who knows what the reason for the problem was ..

[grumpy]

why knock them at all?

part engineer humor and part an understanding that they were tools with known characteristics...
making them useful as tools. I wouldn't make too much of it, as I expect not much was intended.
Some folks love 'em stock, certain vintages, modified, re-crossover-ed, etc... (I am one). There
are those who do not, including some sound engineers.

Being aware of this, I found the comment somewhat humorous, not malicious.

I do agree with the notion of leaving well enough alone... best one can, but enhanced is unnecessary.
multi-channel mixes with artist involvement I view as a distinct product.

Hope the box set is what you're anticipating!

[Wagner]

part engineer humor and part an understanding that they were tools with known characteristics...
making them useful as tools. I wouldn't make too much of it, as I expect not much was intended.
Some folks love 'em stock, certain vintages, modified, re-crossover-ed, etc... (I am one). There
are those who do not, including some sound engineers.

Being aware of this, I found the comment somewhat humorous, not malicious.

I do agree with the notion of leaving well enough alone... best one can, but enhanced is unnecessary.
multi-channel mixes with artist involvement I view as a distinct product.

Hope the box set is what you're anticipating!

I wasn't (not my intention to make any sort of deal out of it)

Regret making the comment now

I simply found it (the not so subtle knock) a less than 100% compatible statement considering their stated mission

It's not an issue or problem for me, glad they stuck with them

It was the correct decision if they are serious

Although I don't really need to now that Fremer has given them the nod, I'll know when I hear them!

[Wagner]

Hope the box set is what you're anticipating!

Which one? Isn't Paul about due one too?

I mean I know it's been at least 6 months since all those limited edition remasters of his came out, new label relationship and all.

Ringo's Rhino stuffs got what now 3,4 whole years?

Better get busy, Christmas will soon be here!

Seriously though, I'm ecstatic over all this current interest in vinyl. I have known from the beginning vinyl wasn't dead dead, but I never thought we's see projects like this again. Especially considering the current state of the business.

Wonder how long it'll be before the chinese knock offs show up, the ones that smell like industrial solvent!

[grumpy]

Lol, I just mean the set of topic.

I'm certainly enjoying the renewed interest in
this aspect of a long audio interest/hobby/part-of-my-"growing-up"

[Wagner]

Lol, I just mean the set of topic.

I'm certainly enjoying the renewed interest in
this aspect of a long audio interest/hobby/part-of-my-"growing-up"

YOU and ME both Brother!

I've mentioned it elsewhere (I think)

I just finished up a total re-cap on two very nice direct drives, one for me the other my son

One XTAL-Lock the other a relatively simple servo type

Newly acquired table had a SHURE V-15 Type IV a Type III on the other

Type III fell apart from rotten body plastic, fairly common, out gassing, Type IV is fine and still has enough life left in the stylus for me to know it's 100%

Debating whether to go the JICO route or what. The arm on the table I'm keeping would probably be better served with a moving coil but my other arm is a medium mass as well. It set up fine though once I got the table up and running and tracks like a son of a bitch, Very very nice deck and I'm not a great DD fan when they have ICs inside but this one keeps the count down low. Here it is:
http://www.thevintageknob.org/sony-PS-X60.html

Wish I had my cartridge situation finalized before these new discs get here, would be a first true test. This machine, even with the tired original stylus sounds GREAT (but too iffy for anything new or valuable). Bests my Rega in some regards. And man do I love that fully automatic! Forgot how nice they were; I haven't owned an automatic since Reagan was president, and even that one was a semi-automatic belt drive. After doing the boards and cutting the electrolytic count in half with stacked film, I think I'm in love. Feel good now that I won't take out an IC and have one good looking door stop because I was lazy.

My apologies for the derail on both counts, but figured while we were talking I'd ask

Just posted in marketplace, I need a couple .033uF X1/Y2 types in radial if anyone has any to spare

Mouser and similar no can do

Application specific and I'd rather not tie a bunch together to hit the target value if I can avoid it; it's on a fairly tight PC I just made pristine

[grumpy]

Y2 if that will work:

http://www.justradios.com/Y2capacitors.html

X1/Y2 seems to be limited in value (at the places I found).

[Wagner]

Y2 if that will work:

http://www.justradios.com/Y2capacitors.html

X1/Y2 seems to be limited in value (at the places I found).

Thank you
I'm familiar with that guy, ordered a few things from him ages ago for an old Philco
X1/Y2 is what I need
I may just go with a .01uF. Long story, but this deck's service manual gives (4) different values depending on market and line voltage.
Interestingly, Canadian and U.S.A. models are identical in every detail except the Canadian version calls for a .022uF in that spot where the U.S.A. version calls for the oddball .033uF
Thought it might be some code thing but you'd think it would just as cheap if not cheaper to use one cap that's big enough to cover all the market versions (4) not to mention simplicity on the assembly line
The U.K. model uses (2) .01uFs?
Not fully understanding the "whys" of the architecture of the circuit and why SONY did what they did I'd feel better going with what's already in there
It's just (appears) to be a surge suppressor across the switch electrically which makes all the variety even more strange

[SEAWOLF97]

Maybe get back to topic ?

here is a LHF testimonial on the mono disk.

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbullet...l=1#post366185