I don't like them. The stereo remasters have been compressed, which makes them sound louder and "better" in a quick A/B comparison, but that does violence to the music. The mono remasters weren't compressed, and to my ears, they are the better of the three (original stereo, mono and stereo remasters).
Why do the new 2009 Beatles CDs sound so good?
It seems a small (maybe big) miracle what they've done with the Beatles 9/9/09 cd box. These were always piercing and grainy (since 1987), and now they are just about the best CDs I have (and this includes SACDs). If it can be done here, it seems like this could be done with other popular music discs.
It seems that the problems in digital are not in the medium itself, but the way the recordings are made.
Companies like DCC and MFSL tried to improve things, but the Beatles box seems to surpass these by far.
A lot of people are quick to criticize digital vs. vinyl, but, to my ears, the Beatles now sound better than vinyl ever did. Anyway, if anyone could shed light on how this was accomplished, I'd be curious.
It seems that the problems in digital are not in the medium itself, but the way the recordings are made.
Companies like DCC and MFSL tried to improve things, but the Beatles box seems to surpass these by far.
A lot of people are quick to criticize digital vs. vinyl, but, to my ears, the Beatles now sound better than vinyl ever did. Anyway, if anyone could shed light on how this was accomplished, I'd be curious.