The Beatles Vinyl...coming soon?

[beatcomber]

When I played my Parlophone issue of MMT you can hear the loud tape hiss between the tracks. I'm really surprised that since EMI owns the original masters, that they did not put out their version like the all stereo German release from a few years before.

The 7" Parlophone double-EP sounds wonderful. The Capitol mono LP also sounds surprisingly excellent too, it's a shame it's so rare.

 

[boatofcar]

These are a few articles from MF's website that talk about the CD remasters and upcoming vinyl. The last is an interview with George Martin talking about the butchering by Capitol.
http://www.musicangle.com/shownews.php?id=160
http://www.musicangle.com/feat.php?id=178
http://www.musicangle.com/feat.php?id=50

Thanks!

 

[RobRoy]

For the love of all that is holy, when in the heck are they going to release The Beatles vinyl box??? We know it's coming. Michael Fremer made a mention of the cause for delay in his review of The Stones' box sets. But when? Is there any update on this....anywhere?

Supposedly it will be from the digital masters that were used for the CD reissues. Not ideal, but it will still be nice to have a modern pressing on audiophile vinyl in a nice package. As someone commented about the Stones' box, no it isn't perfect, but look at it as the last time this will be done in our lifetimes if ever. The resurgence in vinyl will most likely not last forever and then these audiophile reissues will be very few and far between. Were it not for the sorry state of the music business, I don't think record companies would even notice the blip that this resurgence has caused. They only cater to it now because they are hurting so bad.

A couple of days ago, while posting here, I used uTorrent to download the entire beatles discography, complete with photos, liner notes, "making of" videos, etc.

So I'm good!

 

[Ronald1973]

Okay, I'm lost. Understand first and foremost I'm only a casual Fab Four fan so maybe I'm missing something. What are the differences between the mono and stereo mixes? I heard the stereo mixes of some of the songs from Beatles '65 (it wasn't that album but a comp album that had some of the songs) and the only difference I could tell was it was in stereo and sounded a heckuva lot better than the mono versions I've heard.

BTW, for my money, you can't beat "Baby's In Black" in stereo!!!

 

[RobRoy]

Okay, I'm lost. Understand first and foremost I'm only a casual Fab Four fan so maybe I'm missing something. What are the differences between the mono and stereo mixes? I heard the stereo mixes of some of the songs from Beatles '65 (it wasn't that album but a comp album that had some of the songs) and the only difference I could tell was it was in stereo and sounded a heckuva lot better than the mono versions I've heard.

BTW, for my money, you can't beat "Baby's In Black" in stereo!!!

Many of the original stereo Beatles recordings are an interesting, uh, experiment. All the instruments are on one side and the voices on the other, or some other odd combination. The result is annoying but there are interesting opportunities. For Example, either by using "mono left" or "mono right" (or the balance knob if you don't have those settings) you can listen to the vocals with no instruments, and vice-versa.

In a way they are like ready made Karaoke songs sometimes.

 

[Jack Lord]

Okay, I'm lost. Understand first and foremost I'm only a casual Fab Four fan so maybe I'm missing something. What are the differences between the mono and stereo mixes? I heard the stereo mixes of some of the songs from Beatles '65 (it wasn't that album but a comp album that had some of the songs) and the only difference I could tell was it was in stereo and sounded a heckuva lot better than the mono versions I've heard.

BTW, for my money, you can't beat "Baby's In Black" in stereo!!!

Let's just say the difference between Sgt Pepper in Stereo and Mono is almost like night and day with the Mono being vastly superior.

Pepper and a lot of their 1966 stuff, Day Tripper in particular, sound horrendous in Stereo. Crappy seperation. But in Mono, it sounds as it should.

With the White Album, I can go either way. Both sound fine and a bit different from one another.

More specifically, the oft told story is that the stereo versions were afterthoughts. Mono was still the standard and that is where the attention to detail went. Plus Capitol screwed up the transfers from Parlophone mono to US stereo.

I have been critically listening to the Beatles since 1979. It is only in the last few years I have been exposed to Mono. I think the explanation makes sense.

Mono rocks. I will never listen to Pepper in stereo again if I can help it.:thmbsp:

 

[Jack Lord]

Many of the original stereo Beatles recordings are an interesting, uh, experiment. All the instruments are on one side and the voices on the other, or some other odd combination. The result is annoying but there are interesting opportunities. For Example, either by using "mono left" or "mono right" (or the balance knob if you don't have those settings) you can listen to the vocals with no instruments, and vice-versa.

In a way they are like ready made Karaoke songs sometimes.

LOL!

In the Kids are Alright, there is a scene where some girl is asking Pete Townsend about the Beatles. He goes on to describe their stereo seperation as being "clever" but sounding "flippin lousy."

I used to dismiss that as jealousy, but after procuring the Mono box, I hear what he meant. He was right.

Gotta get some early Who in Mono.

 

[Chimpkin]

I hate to spread rumors but I was talking to a guy who seemed very confident that the Beatles remastered vinyl will be priced $24.99 for singles and $34.99 for doubles. There are two doubles in the box set right? The box set will be somewhere around $400.

I've spent a lot of money on nice Beatles records and have found some really cool stuff. I'm not sure it will be worth my money to buy stuff I already have.

 

[goldwax]

The Mofi is definitely from the original stereo master tapes. It was advertised as such and everyone knows that because that was their big selling point. "Half Speed from Original Master Tapes".

I said questionable on the other boxes because I've never seen any statement to indicate that they were from the original tapes. Is it tape copy of the originals, or a tape of a tape copy? Who knows. I would think that Mofi wouldn't have made such a big deal out of theirs being from the original tapes if the previous US/UK boxes that preceded it by only a couple of years had been as well.

If you have a UK box, then maybe. If you have a Capitol US box, doubtful. Those tapes weren't leaving the EMI vault to be flown to the US. Even if the lacquer was cut in the UK from the originals and then shipped to the US for plating, who cares. The rebound of the lacquer during transport would have negated any gain from original tapes.

The definitive answer on all this can be obtained from Michael Fremer. He's talked with Sir Martin and Jeff Emmerick at length about all things Beatles recording related.

The MoFi suffers from questionable EQ choices according to many. Some people might be fine with it, but to my mind that severely limits its attractiveness even if it is sourced directly from the original master tapes. (And MoFi only trumpeted the fact that it was sourced from the Original Master Tapes because that was their tagline and branding. It's not that any specific album they decided to reissue had suffered from non-original master tape usage, but rather that all albums that MoFi reissued were themselves guaranteed to use the original master tapes. They didn't make their money by "correcting" bad pressings of albums, but rather by reissuing supposedly audiophile versions of popular good-selling albums whether or not the stock pressings sounded good or bad.)

The UK and US Blue Boxes are the same in that they both use stock UK pressings of the albums. The only exception is the Rarities album, which differs in the US and the UK. These stock pressings sound phenomenal. I believe that early boxes use some of the same stampers as the original pressings, while later copies of the box contain pressings made from lacquers cut around 1972 by Harry T. Moss (HTM). These by all accounts were cut using from the original master tapes, yet without MoFi's questionable EQ choices. The advantage that these pressings have over '60s EMI originals is that they tend to be cleaner and undamaged, and are much cheaper. The advantage over the MoFi box, is again that they don't suffer from boosted lows and highs, and also that they are much cheaper.

The advantage that they (presumably) will have over any 2011 vinyl reissues is that they are analog sourced and cheaper.

If you care about the Beatles on vinyl, you really do owe it to yourself to get a clean Blue Box and check it out for yourself.

 

[Vintage_Hi-F]

A note: The Mobile Fidelity box is very smiley face EQ'ed.

While I have no real experience with the Mofi box set I can say that I've found most of the Mobile Fidelity releases of albums (Pyromania, Fragile, Toto IV, ect) actually have a slightly lower DR rating than a normal release of the same year. While it really doesn't effect the sound quality I have to wonder why if they are suppose to be the "superior" release.

 

[Future Man]

The MoFi suffers from questionable EQ choices according to many. Some people might be fine with it, but to my mind that severely limits its attractiveness even if it is sourced directly from the original master tapes. (And MoFi only trumpeted the fact that it was sourced from the Original Master Tapes because that was their tagline and branding. It's not that any specific album they decided to reissue had suffered from non-original master tape usage, but rather that all albums that MoFi reissued were themselves guaranteed to use the original master tapes. They didn't make their money by "correcting" bad pressings of albums, but rather by reissuing supposedly audiophile versions of popular good-selling albums whether or not the stock pressings sounded good or bad.)

The UK and US Blue Boxes are the same in that they both use stock UK pressings of the albums. The only exception is the Rarities album, which differs in the US and the UK. These stock pressings sound phenomenal. I believe that early boxes use some of the same stampers as the original pressings, while later copies of the box contain pressings made from lacquers cut around 1972 by Harry T. Moss (HTM). These by all accounts were cut using from the original master tapes, yet without MoFi's questionable EQ choices. The advantage that these pressings have over '60s EMI originals is that they tend to be cleaner and undamaged, and are much cheaper. The advantage over the MoFi box, is again that they don't suffer from boosted lows and highs, and also that they are much cheaper.

The advantage that they (presumably) will have over any 2011 vinyl reissues is that they are analog sourced and cheaper.

If you care about the Beatles on vinyl, you really do owe it to yourself to get a clean Blue Box and check it out for yourself.

Interesting about the stampers and lacquers used for the blue box (and red mono box?). The Mofi and Blue boxes both have the bigger deal breaking issue for me...stereo. I want mono. Since hearing originals in Mono, I want nothing else, except for those recordings that were originally recorded for stereo (Yellow Submarine, Let it Be, Abbey Road). So I guess if the red box is sourced from original lacquers, that may be what I'm looking for. I do have a mono copy of Help! that was pressed in the UK in the early 80's. EMI went back to the old Parlaphone label. When I first found it, I thought it was an original pressing. Later I learned it was part of an 80's mono reissue in the UK. It sounds amazing. I considered for a while trying to track down more, but it became an exercise in futility.

 

[goldwax]

Interesting about the stampers and lacquers used for the blue box (and red mono box?). The Mofi and Blue boxes both have the bigger deal breaking issue for me...stereo. I want mono. Since hearing originals in Mono, I want nothing else, except for those recordings that were originally recorded for stereo (Yellow Submarine, Let it Be, Abbey Road). So I guess if the red box is sourced from original lacquers, that may be what I'm looking for. I do have a mono copy of Help! that was pressed in the UK in the early 80's. EMI went back to the old Parlaphone label. When I first found it, I thought it was an original pressing. Later I learned it was part of an 80's mono reissue in the UK. It sounds amazing. I considered for a while trying to track down more, but it became an exercise in futility.

Oh, if you want mono then you have two choices besides original the original pressings and the 1982 UK reissues: the Red Box (which is pricey but good if you want to get everything in one fell swoop) or the '82 and '86 red vinyl Japanese reissues. I have four or five of the Japanese reissues and they sound amazing. Great quiet vinyl, too. Some folks say that the '82 UK reissues (on black vinyl) sound closer to the UK originals, but the vinyl tends to be noisier. That may be, but I'm happy with the Japanese versions and will continue to seek them out. They are not cheap, though--at around $100 a pop. ($150 for Sgt. Pepper's and $200 for the White Album.)

Or maybe EMI will issue the CD Mono box on vinyl!

 

[KeninDC]

The beauty of the older pressings, especially mono, is that they were tube cut. Prices for tube cuts are, of course, quite dear.

This site is great for knowing your Beatles labels:

http://www.jpgr.co.uk/i_beatleslp_date.html

One has to weigh paying $200 for an early mono UK NM LP pressing of "Rubber Soul" vs. a perfect hi-rez mono LP for about $25.

Of course, some folks will purchase both.

 

[goldwax]

Thanks for the info. Perhaps this explains why I didn't care for my MMT MoFi copy and dumped it on fleabay. I replaced it with a 70's Parlaphone copy which is even more horrendous. I guess I should have kept the MoFi version before getting something else. Lesson learned.

The German MMT that looks like this is the generally preferred version (apart from the original EP, of course!).

 

[Future Man]

Or maybe EMI will issue the CD Mono box on vinyl!

And this is what I'm waiting for and the original subject of this thread. It may not be the best solution, but I can't spend $200 on a single record anymore. Three little kids at home with a stay at home mom, not to mention other hobbies (i.e. a money pit on 4 wheels in the garage), have seen those days pass by.

 

[Jack Lord]

And this is what I'm waiting for and the original subject of this thread. It may not be the best solution, but I can't spend $200 on a single record anymore. Three little kids at home with a stay at home mom, not to mention other hobbies (i.e. a money pit on 4 wheels in the garage), have seen those days pass by.

Form a coop. Get a bunch of guys together and each buys one and tapes it for the rest.

 

[davidshirt]

I just hope the upcoming re-issues are good enough to make me stop wanting to find Japanese vinyl pressings, original Parlaphone pressings, etc.