Have not heard a word, and none in print either. |
This site:
http://myvinylreview.blogspot.com/2009/05/beatles-remastered-mono-and-stereo.html
...gives a November 14th, 2009 date. Scroll down the page for info on the Vinyl release. |
a bunch of speculation online is all i've seen. i've heard 10.10.10 or this november. time will tell. |
Latest I heard is the 14 Nov '09 date has been pushed to 04 May 2010. No firm reason why the slip. No box sets -- individual stereo 180g RTI pressed LP's only. |
Really? Stereo only!? Argh. I mean, the Dylan stuff has come out in mono. What gives?? |
since we're discussing mono/stereo vinyl, do i need a mono cart to play the mono vinyl (if it surfaces?)? if so, i'd probably just spring for the stereo vinyl as i don't wanna buy a new cart just for a few albums. |
How many F...n reissues with this stuff already? Just another way to extort and squeeze more money out of poor Beatle fans.This stuff has been re-released umpteenth times already. How many copies of the same album do you need? The definitive is always the original pressing. |
well actually, i only had a crappy cd copy of sgt. peppers, let it be, and the second disc of the white album, so getting the entire set in mono plus the remaining remastered stereos was a no brainer for me.
and....since i don't have any beatles albums on vinyl... |
I like and own most of the Beatles music myself on vynil. Howerver, I do have to agree with Fromunda. With all the great music and options for re-issues I think maybe its time to broaden the choices instead of re-re-re-re-re-re-re-issuing the same stuff over and over again. I resent the marketing strategy of advertising limited edition to drive the prices up only to have it re-issued again. Especially when there have been a fair amount of lifeless re-issue DUDS. I bought the new cd version of Rubber Soul as it is my favorite Beatles album. It,s is pretty descent sounding but still can,t stand neck and neck with the original vynil mono version my oldest sister originaly bought and gave to me or the Mobile Fidelity version I also own. I may seem pesamystic or negative but I am not. It,s just frustrating when there is a vast market out there and with a new and growing interest in Vynil again I just wish the industry would realize that if they offered a more DIVERCE quality catalogue it would sell more than just turntables and LPs. A lot of other peices are needed to complete the system without even taking into account those of us with the phile illness to change and upgrade. I guess in reality with the economy in the tank now it won't happen right now anyway. Cheers |
Vinyl people will be very disappointed as the source for the vinyl is the digital product. Best to go find the original vinyl that was cut from analogue tapes. |
Bucenero is correct - the vinyl will be ProTooled digital. A no compression, no noise suppression and no digital anything reissue is the 1980 Mobile Fidelity box set remaster. Clean copies went for about $1k ten years ago - I don't know what they go for now. |
I'm waiting for the remastered remasters.
There will be a mere 1,500,000 sets and available only on 7 continents.
We can expect further restrictions as the project develops. |
the new cd's sound better than the lp has2be's sister gave me(just kidding). seriously, both the stereo and mono cd's are better than anything to date, including the priceless original lp's and the mofi's....also the new lps won't be happening for a year. |
Hey Jaybo, I don,t doubt that some would feel that the new CD,s sound better than the original LP in their opinions. I have a copy of the new Rubber Soul CD and it is quite good as I previously stated. The original issue that I was given from my sister who like most girls back then spent more time oogling over the pictures of Paul than listening to the music is mint. Played through my system I prefer that over the new CD . I use an Esoteric DV 50S for digital playback so perhaps you have a better digital front end than I do. I certainly would not discourage anyone from these new Cd's as they are quite good I just prefer the vynil original I have. When I said they can,t stand neck and neck with the original perhaps I should of said as close as I have heard yet. Which is after all just a subjective opinion coming from a pro vynil person. I probably will buy Abbey Road, Help and the White album of these CD,s at some time. Being the youngest of eight and in my mid fifties my seven brothers and sisters all gave me their albums back when nobody wanted them anymore. So I am fortunate to have added about 400 excellant shape originals from the early 60's to the mid 70's of Rock , Blues, Motown and Pop music after sorting through them on top of my own purchases. After my parent,s both passed away recently I was also given roughly 600 78's and 33's from the 40's, 50's and 60's Big band, Blues and Pop singers from those era's I,m still sorting through. I know your just kidding about the sister thing! She only ever gave out one album to a freind that didn,t bring it back and it wasn,t the beatles or hers and my brother still teases her about it. My brother inlaw said the only thing she ever gave another man was a headache. He is expected to fully recover. Cheers |
girls used to write their names on their albums in the sixties, which was the fate of every dave clark 5 record ever made that was played. historically (being an american), rubber soul beginning with 'i've just seen a face' and in stereo is still my favorite way of hearing it. i've got parlophones,mofi's, japanese pressings, domestic pressings, etc, etc, etc... |
I love the Beatles music still to this day (after innumerable plays) and the latest re-re-reissue is evidence of the value of this catalog, both to the provider and the user. Nothing of any value in this world is free. That's not to say of course that money and what it affords, buys happiness yet, I for one, do enjoy and am truly thankful for eating well. That said, I do have to DIS-agree with Fromunda, in that it is no conspiracy to strip the innocent (Beatles) music lover once again... if you find value, want, need (?) in the current reissue than buy, if you don't (because you already own what you feel to be a superior source, AKA: early analogue pressings), then... save your ducats. No whining.
What does mystify me, and I admittedly claim little knowledge of the digital world, is why such an honored and valuable catalog such as this one would sit for so long (with the advent and refinement in the art of high res transfer capabilities) and not see a thorough going over for the masses. And prey tell, why not DSD? It offered beautiful transfers to vinyl for the Rolling Stones albums in 2003 Abkco reissue on both SACD and vinyl.
After listening to the latest issue of little silver discs, I found them enjoyable but, I'll wait and see how it all pans out. Sure would dig a set of pristine analogue mono copies on polyvinyl chloride, though.
Happy (re)Listening! |
It seems to me that I read somewhere that the remasters on vinyl might be out somtime next month in(November). I am not sure if this accurate or if the date has been bushed back. |
vinyl copies of digital masters , just buy the cds |
Like I say Coffee2... I'd have agreed with you in spades if I didn't own and listen extensively to the DSD Abkco reissues of the early Rolling Stones albums.
And if you think about it... does Trinity Sessions by the Cowboy Junkies on vinyl sound analogue (good) to ya? Guess what, sorry digital and there are many more.
Countless beautiful performances have been buggered up forever by digital masters. I would prefer artists just sticking to non digital formats whenever possible, just my opinion.
Happy (01001110?) Listening! |
Digital has been a problem because it was a new medium, so remasters make sense, but I don't understand why they would remaster the vinyl? |
>>10-25-09: Cyclonicman
but I don't understand why they would remaster the vinyl?<<
Really? I can think of a couple.
1. $
2. $$ |
|
£, ¥, , or $... anyway you care to express it, Audiofeil might just be on to
something!
Cyclonicman, if I'm reading between your lines, and I would be one to agree,
why fix what isn't broke. The reasoning behind the RS catalog was that it was
being refreshed and prepared for SACD transfer though DSD and while they were
at it there was a small demand to give vinyl folks a chance to have a fresh
pressing, and some may think a better copy than the nasty careless dubs of the
eighties, unless you have a basement filled with first pressing on DECCA with no
boxing that you would be willing to share.... It goes without saying, but I'll say it
anyway, not everyone has a solid copy of everything. But many of us are trying!
So it goes with the early Parlophones in mono.
Happy (fresh vinyl) Listening! |
Sayles, I actually have a Beatles remaster story about fixing what ain't broke. I have the mono remasters and the set comes with a booklet of the pressings. What I found curious is that George Martin performed a stereo remix of Help and Rubber Soul in 1987. Well the mono version of Help and Rubber Soul also includes the Stereo Mix that was used for the albums way back in 1965/66, but these were never released on CD because Martin did his remix. I have to tell you that the original vinyl mixes sound better than the remix that Martin decided to do in 1987. The book stated that he was not in the studio when most of the original stereo mixes were done for Help and Rubber Soul way back when and so he decided he would try a remix 22 years later!! If you have the opportunity, you should listen to the stereo mix for Help and Rubber Soul that is included in the mono set. Martin's 87 CD remix choked the life out of those two albums and unfortunately it was his 87 remix that they used for the Stereo remasters instead of the original mixes done for vinyl. It makes me wonder what will happen to their music further down the road. |
