Beatles remasters - any thoughts?

[admin_exported]

Should we all rush out and buy them when they're released later this year, or stick with the original 1980s CD issues/vinyl?

I also read that as well as stereo remasters, there'll be a box set of mono albums too. Is this a cash in for completists or would the earlier tracks benefit from being in mono?

 

[Anonymous]

Can't wait for the video game....

 

[the record spot]

Nothing wrong with mono if it's sympathetically done. As for this news, I must check out the comments on the Steve Hoffman forum...they've been on about this for YEARS. As for me, I'll be interested to see how they've done it, but might snap up a few of the AAD releases from the 80s still. My views on remastering might be well known from the odd post on the odd thread on here...! Hopefully the Apple boys will do the work justice.

 

[matthewpiano]

Hmmmm... I've got every album on CD so there is going to have to be a big improvement in sound to justify buying the new remasters. If they are better I'll buy them though, because for me their output still sits right at the very top of popular music.

 

[kena]

Well they have spent 8 years remastering them so hopefully that means they will have done a good job. We will see

 

[Anonymous]

Depends if they sound better than the original cd releases. Having found out about the reissues,it get's kind of annoying that they would do this.I have not really listened thoroughly to the beatles cd's in my collection and won't throw the extra doe for any of the new copies.

 

[lonely boy]

The 1987 masterings can definitely improved upon, but I very much doubt that they will, most poular artists and producers don't care about sound quality.

Lets hope that they aren't more heavily compressed, no-noised, brickwalled and microwaved to death monstrosities!

 

[Anonymous]

matthewpiano: for me their output still sits right at the very top of popular music.

It seems the viewers of MTV disagree:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/musicblog/2009/apr/09/behind-music-mtv-craig-david

not a mention of the fab 4...ÿ

ÿ

 

[Don Guess]

There's been some increase in gain levels - to reflect modern mastering styles or something like that.

Lets hope and pray that they haven't completely ruined it by compressing it to hell in the loudness wars.

 

[matthewpiano]

charlieh1f1:
matthewpiano: for me their output still sits right at the very top of popular music.

It seems the viewers of MTV disagree:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/musicblog/2009/apr/09/behind-music-mtv-craig-david

not a mention of the fab 4...ÿ

ÿ

Just goes to show how crazy things have got. When Craig David is so highly regarded I start to worry about the future of music, but then MTV is hardly where its at really.

 

[Anonymous]

My ancient uncle has an original, bought in 1967, copy of Sgt Pepper, played only a handful of times, that he refuses to sell to me. Is life cruel or what?

 

[Gusboll]

I don't particularly care for the beatles but nevertheless in my opinion, remastering is on the whole, bad.

 

[chebby]

I lived though the whole Beatles thing as a child. It was the audio wallpaper of my youth. Ok for nostalgia now and then but overrated. There was so much better around. (Besides who could rebel with music your parents would hum along to with as much familiarity - to them - as Doris Day or Glenn Miller?)

 

[Don Guess]

chebby:
I lived though the whole Beatles thing as a child. It was the audio wallpaper of my youth. Ok for nostalgia now and then but overrated. There was so much better around. (Besides who could rebel with music your parents would hum along to with as much familiarity - to them - as Doris Day or Glenn Miller?)

Who was better and why? Genuine question..

 

[Anonymous]

chebby:
I lived though the whole Beatles thing as a child. It was the audio wallpaper of my youth. Ok for nostalgia now and then but overrated. There was so much better around. (Besides who could rebel with music your parents would hum along to with as much familiarity - to them - as Doris Day or Glenn Miller?)

OVERRATED?? Have you tried to play their stuff?? They make Pink Floyd seem like an Abba clone

 

[matthewpiano]

Sorry Chebby but I have to disagree. Brilliant songwriting, great musicianship and a hugely varied output. Every time I play a Beatles album I sit in awe at what they achieved musically.

 

[manicm]

chebby:

I lived though the whole Beatles thing as a child. It was the audio wallpaper of my youth. Ok for nostalgia now and then but overrated. There was so much better around. (Besides who could rebel with music your parents would hum along to with as much familiarity - to them - as Doris Day or Glenn Miller?)

Overplayed maybe, definitely not overrated - not saying there were not other excellent bands around - there were, obvious one being the Stones.

But saying they were overrated well - even Dylan acknowledged their influence and them in turn his.

And anyone who compares the Beatles to boy bands today are insane - what the Beatles along with the Beach Boys did in the mid-sixties was revolutionary in terms of melody and song structure.

Some boy bands claim to write their own music but it's all meaningless cos they all sound alike - and they will when their sole aim is to garner top 20 status with teens. Why 'write' your own stuff when it's all gonna sound to all others?? My cat may well have written all the boy bad stuff - it's all blatantly generic.

I mean to date there's simply no-one who could have written a song like Day In The Life or Strawberry Fields.

If you take the Beatles as what they were - a pop band - you would conclude that right up till Sgt Peppers they were peerless, even today.

 

[Alec]

I concur with those totally unnecassarily pointing out that the Beatles are/were rubbish...

 

[Clare Newsome]

Well i'm excited about the remasters if they can get the same level of sound quality as the LOVE album shows is available from the mastertapes... But agree, no frills.

 

[matthewpiano]

I rate Abba too. 'SOS' is pretty much the perfect pop song.

 

[JoelSim]

The best Beatles stuff was when they were stoned. The earlier stuff was pop and quite frankly doesn't do it for me.ÿ

She loves you yeah yeah yeah. Get over it!

ÿ

ÿ

 

[survivor]

I have the early albums on vinyl and the later ones on cd. I shan`t rush out to buy the new ones but I daresay if they are good enough I may well buy some over time. Let`s wait and see how good they are!

 

[survivor]

matthewpiano:I rate Abba too. 'SOS' is pretty much the perfect pop song.

Brilliant pop song. `Mamma Mia` hit the number one spot but it was `SOS` which done the ground work to help make it happen.

 

[manicm]

It's not even their own song but I dare anyone not to be physically moved by John's singing on Twist And Shout - this track still rocks more than most, today.

Or check out how She Loves You just drives and rocks so effortlessly, fluidly and urgently - today's music just doesn't do this, it simply doesn't, even today's best rock bands just cannot do this. Ultimately today's music is just tedium. In both mainstream rock and pop some might try to innovate but more often than not it's just tedium.

I dig ABBA too - just don't *^^()_ tell anyone.

 

[Anonymous]

Never bought any of their stuff and don't intend to start now...........