nice article - The Beatles Mono Mania [Archive]

View Full Version : nice article - The Beatles Mono Mania

SEAWOLF97

09-11-2014, 04:26 PM

Wagner

09-12-2014, 02:58 PM

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

http://recordcollectornews.com/2014/09/the-beatles-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! :D) Always does!

SEAWOLF97

09-12-2014, 04:19 PM

Wagner

09-12-2014, 05:27 PM

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/2014/09/02/six-george-harrison-albums-to-be-remastered-and-reissued/?_php=true&_type=blogs&_r=0

Wagner

09-12-2014, 05:35 PM

Two decent video clips:
http://www.elusivedisc.com/The-Beatles-in-Mono-Vinyl-Box-180g-14LP-Set/productinfo/CAPLP63379/

Wagner

09-12-2014, 06:04 PM

SEAWOLF97

09-12-2014, 06:15 PM

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 .. :dont-know:

grumpy

09-12-2014, 06:20 PM

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

09-12-2014, 06:38 PM

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! :D

Wagner

09-12-2014, 06:47 PM

Hope the box set is what you're anticipating! :)

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

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

09-12-2014, 07:01 PM

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

09-12-2014, 07:40 PM

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

09-12-2014, 08:39 PM

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

09-12-2014, 11:06 PM

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

09-13-2014, 08:43 AM

Maybe get back to topic ?

here is a LHF testimonial on the mono disk.

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?2724-What-s-Playing-Now&p=366185&viewfull=1#post366185

Wagner

09-13-2014, 10:26 AM

Maybe get back to topic ?

here is a LHF testimonial on the mono disk.

http://www.audioheritage.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?2724-What-s-Playing-Now&p=366185&viewfull=1#post366185

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

And I'll say it again, I apologize.

I learned a long time ago not to allow other folks' reviews of how a record sounds influence my decision to buy it, or not.

It's out of print now, but I own a NM copy of the Murray Hill set of Furtwangler conducting the near complete "Ring" at LaScala, 1950. I have NEVER read a positive review by anyone regarding it's sound quality. In fact, it is most often trashed, big time.
In reality (to my ears as well as my son's) it is perfectly fine for a live orchestral recording made in 1950, the pressings are decent enough to play well and is no worse than many others out there. Negative stigma attached to Murray Hill releases perhaps? It is a wonderful record (performance) and I am glad we have a good copy. And for now it's the only legitimate way to have this material that I am aware.

On the other hand, just to cite one example of many, I own the disc "Jacaras!" on Harmonia Mundi. It received almost orgasmically positive and glowing reviews from everyone in the "mainstream" classical "press" (rags like Stereophile). They hailed it as a break through in sound quality! I took the bait. Not particularly crazy for 18th century Spanish Baroque, but the fact that the disc and recording sounds like hammered shit doesn't help matters either! AND, it was expensive back in the day, around $30 bucks.

My point and how it relates to the topic? I reiterate; NEVER again will I allow anyone's review of how a record or CD sounds influence my decision to buy it and try it, ever.

It's a losing game and can cost you in the long run, especially if the title goes quickly out of print.

Nice thing about Beatles stuff? If it IS really bad, like the vinyl release of "The Beatles 1" I can always easily sell it off and recoup most of my monies if the need be. All of it and then some for sealed copies from my inventory.

So I'm not reading reviews, just ordering as many sets as my wife will allow ;)! These things always seem to get released right when I'm having financial difficulties! :(

With a box set of anything Beatles you can just sit on it. Yes, I do speculate on records. Generally I try to stockpile a minimum of (5) copies of everything released with their name on it (vinyl only). Better return than many investment vehicles or even some stocks :) Beatles have long been a "blue chip" of mine. I make no apologies! :)

Back to this guy and records; I feel the same way; he's a wind bag but he's right with his points on record collecting for sound quality. I do both:
http://www.high-endaudio.com/supreme.html

This may seem as if I'm continuing to knock your topic off course, not the case. If I can get all of this tied together to get to my point it's the fact that almost 1/2 the INITIAL ink being spilled and hype over this current money maker is regarding the PACKAGING and the damn BOOK which don't mean jack in my final analysis.

That stuff is very nice and fun, but I'd be happy if the pressings were top tier and in order to do that had to be delivered in generic white jackets.

All of this "box set" hoopla is growing tiresome and is so the opposite of how things used to be.

I am EXTREMELY happy to see that unlike the MONO CD box set, with the vinyl they've figured it out and are selling individual titles as they did with the STEREO. But that's obviously a financial decision as well in order to amortize costs more effectively and provide a hedge.

Will be interesting to see how long those remain available. This is all so deliberate, the inferred collectability and catch phrases like "limited edition". It's as if the Beatles met the Beanie Babies and had a child.

Every time they do this I have very mixed emotions. Even though I do participate in it to a degree further down the road, I still find all of the commercialism surrounding these events mildly troubling.
I don't enjoy the skepticism it elicits in my mind and the only way I can dispel that is to buy hold and actually HEAR a copy of whatever it is myself.

SEAWOLF97

09-13-2014, 10:33 AM

, well IF you had followed the link ,,,, it was posted by a LHF member who listens to more
vinyl than anyone in the Western World ;) , who details the price paid and the bonus stuff
tossed in.

I usually trust his opinions, despite his lean towards SpeakerLab speakers ...:p

After being here a while, you'll know who to trust, and who to blow off ...
(and you'll know that not every response needs a thousand words)

Wagner

09-13-2014, 12:20 PM

OK, well IF you had followed the link ,,,, it was posted by a LHF member to listens to more
vinyl than anyone in the Western World ;) , who details the price paid and the bonus stuff
tossed in.

I usually trust his opinions, despite his lean towards SpeakerLab speakers ...:p

After being here a while, you'll know who to trust, and who to blow off ...
(and you'll know that not every response needs a thousand words)

I looked at his observations, why do you think I didn't; great price, got it on sale, used a coupon, likes the packaging and also received a promotional T-shirt and thinks the sound quality is "terrific"

Guess that's all I need then!

I'm no where near Seattle though, so I guess no T-shirt for me. (Rasputin's employees keep all that promo shit for themselves)

If you want to deal in bumper sticker sound bites and catch phrases I'll begin now avoiding your posts and threads. Sorry if you don't care for my word count. But then again I don't have thousands and thousand of posts after the 5+ years I've "been here". Guess you can go with either volume (post count) or text size in establishing a rapport.

I made the mistake of assuming you wanted to talk about Beatles records and how we got to where we are with them

My mistake

Take care!

Tom Brennan

09-16-2014, 12:20 PM

When I was young and wanted a Beatles tune I bought a 45. Now I'm old and when I want a Beatles tune I buy it from ITunes; kind'a the same thing.

Wagner

09-20-2014, 09:55 AM

When I was young and wanted a Beatles tune I bought a 45. Now I'm old and when I want a Beatles tune I buy it from ITunes; kind'a the same thing.

But now, no picture sleeves :(