The Remasters, Are They Worth It | The albums | Fab forum

Please consider registering

Log In Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —

— Match —

— Forum Options —

Minimum search word length is 4 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

The Remasters, Are They Worth It
25 June 2013
Mr Bellamy
Near Edinburgh
Shea Stadium
Forum Posts: 428
Member Since:
7 April 2013

The first Beatles cd i got was the Yellow Submarine Songtrack album. I really liked the songs sound quality. However when i came to purchase the remastered version of Sgt. Pepper i felt awfully underwhelmed, not by the songs (which are awesome and its my favorite Beatles album) but by the sound quality which lacked the depth of the YSS album. I only recently learnt that the YSS was completely remixed for the originals.

So my question is should they have remixed all the albums like they did for YSS, because frankly I can't tell the difference between the new remasters and the cd mixes made in the 1980's.

"We can do what we want, we can live as we choose"

25 June 2013
Ron Nasty
"Where have you been?" "I'm not telling you..."
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 3860
Member Since:
17 December 2012

Unlike you I did hear the difference in the Remasters, however I do get the point you're making. The Remasters (mono and stereo) are important however, as they present the music as The Beatles and George Martin signed off on it at the time (with a couple of exceptions) they released it, with the best sound quality possible.

The original music had two steps to release. First The Beatles and George Martin/others would record the music. Second George Martin/others and The Beatles would mix that music how they wanted it heard.

The YSS remixes (which I love), take out that second step, and replace it with new people mixing the original tapes. While I have no problems with remixes, you would lose the picture that was originally painted by the group themselves.

Remix by all means, but the Remasters should always be available because they matter - they are their work.

"I only said we were bigger than Rod... and now there's all this!" Ron Nasty
25 June 2013
Candlestick Park
Forum Posts: 696
Member Since:
16 August 2012

The '87 CDs are pretty flat compared to the '09 remasters.

The YSS is a special case, because of the complete remixing, but the original albums were remastered in 2009 to capture the best elements of the original mixed elements.  If you like what you heard on YSS, I'd recommend "Love", which takes great liberties with the mixes.  If you look around, you can still find the 5.1 DVD version as well.

If you compare the '87s and the '09s on moderately good audio equipment, you can hear sizable differences.  So much to the point that acclaimed needle-drop audiophile bootlegger Dr. Ebbett claimed the '09s sounded  "good enough to make the Ebbetts catalogue solidly inferior".

E is for 'Ergent'.
25 June 2013
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 1470
Member Since:
29 November 2012

Agreed, I never listen to my '87 CDs anymore, even though they've held up remarkably well in the 20 years I've owned them and the 1000s of times I've played them. They're all scratched and dinged and still play fine. But the sound just isn't there compared to the remasters. And I should say I did not get the stereo remasters (other than the final 3 albums), but rather the mono remasters, which are superior in every way.

"I know you, you know me; one thing I can tell you is you got to be free!"


Please Visit My Website, The Rock and Roll Chemist

Twitter: @rocknrollchem

Facebook: rnrchemist


25 June 2013

Forum Posts: 12852
Member Since:
1 May 2011

I can also hear the difference with the remasters; they are cleaner sounding, brighter, meaning that you can hear sounds that were otherwise obscured with the '87 cd's.

As said above keep the original mixes available and then remix if desired. Let It Be Naked also had remixes but since there was a lot of editing and alternate takes its not the same and remember that the available to buy separately Help! and Rubber Soul stereo cds are the '87 Martin remixes. You need the Mono Box to get their original Stereo mixes (I still find that daft).


Don’t make your love suffer insecurities, trade the baggage of self to set another one free. ('Paper Skin' - Kendall Payne)
25 June 2013
Apple rooftop
Forum Posts: 1470
Member Since:
29 November 2012

^it is daft. And honestly, they're still not as good as the mono mixes of those albums. Another reason I like the mono mixes better is that they didn't add compression or limiting to them the way they did with the stereo remasters, so you're getting a more pure sound as well as (what I consider to be) superior mixes.

"I know you, you know me; one thing I can tell you is you got to be free!"


Please Visit My Website, The Rock and Roll Chemist

Twitter: @rocknrollchem

Facebook: rnrchemist


Forum Timezone: Europe/London

Most Users Ever Online: 597

Currently Online: meanmistermustard, Ahhh Girl, Beatleva, Satu
60 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

meanmistermustard: 12852

Ahhh Girl: 7727

parlance: 6959

mr. Sun king coming together: 6931

Annadog40: 6727

Mr. Kite: 5898

Zig: 5701

mithveaen: 4629

Ron Nasty: 3860

trcanberra: 3240

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 88

Members: 3067

Moderators: 4

Admins: 2

Forum Stats:

Groups: 3

Forums: 34

Topics: 3393

Posts: 163795

Newest Members: Little-beatle98, NowhereMan87, Satu, thaliaangelo73, louismetz55118

Moderators: Ahhh Girl: 7727, meanmistermustard: 12852, Zig: 5701, Joe: 3915

Administrators: Joe: 3915, Ellie: 1

Members Birthdays
Today: None
Upcoming: HeyTrud