Author Topic: The Beatles entire original recorded catalogue remastered for 09/09/09 release (Read 4224 times)

FinnishRed · « **on:** April 8, 2009, 01:14:19 PM »

It's official:

http://www.beatles.com/core/news/

Rumours of the release have been going around for a few years now. Looks like the wait is finally over.

Thoughts? Going to buy the remastered versions of these classic albums?

Veinticinco de Mayo · « **Reply #1 on:** April 8, 2009, 01:32:46 PM »

Flog that dead horse just one last time why dontcha...

Scottish-Don · « **Reply #2 on:** April 8, 2009, 01:34:22 PM »

Would like to see them overtake Elvis for most Number 1 Singles and this should help boost their total.

Stussy · « **Reply #3 on:** April 8, 2009, 01:39:47 PM »

I prefer them with a bit of crackle and hiss.

thredworm · « **Reply #4 on:** April 8, 2009, 01:56:12 PM »

Garstonite · « **Reply #5 on:** April 8, 2009, 01:57:01 PM »

Like what-EVER.

shelovesyou · « **Reply #6 on:** April 8, 2009, 02:15:50 PM »

Whats the point in this really ? ?
Im a big beatles fan but this just seems a bit silly really
what is so wrong with whats been released already ? ?

The mono recordings are fantastic , drums in the left ear , Bass in the right ear = magic

FinnishRed · « **Reply #7 on:** April 8, 2009, 02:46:03 PM »

Quote from: shelovesyouyehyehyeh on April 8, 2009, 02:15:50 PM

Whats the point in this really ? ?
Im a big beatles fan but this just seems a bit silly really
what is so wrong with whats been released already ? ?

Well obviously a better sound quality for those who don't own all that corduroy. Other than that, they can earn a few bob again.

gerrardisgod · « **Reply #8 on:** April 8, 2009, 02:48:11 PM »

Released the same day as the Rock Band game, they expect a new wave of Beatles fans so whack out all the Beatles back catalogue at full price.

That's the reason.

rafathegaffa83 · « **Reply #9 on:** April 8, 2009, 02:58:05 PM »

About bloody time!

Djimis Telescopic Leg · « **Reply #10 on:** April 8, 2009, 03:19:24 PM »

"Remastered" albums are a crock of shit. In most cases they just turn the volume up because apparently "loud music sounds better" and lose any sense of the record's original dynamics. It's as if they don't trust the listener to use their volume knob and sacrifice sound quality as a result. Bizarre.

ConnieLFC · « **Reply #11 on:** April 8, 2009, 05:14:04 PM »

I would like specifics on what's being done in terms of "remastering" vs what was done when they first came out on CD back in the 80s? Release of all the mono and stereo mixes is totally cool for school - and of course technology has improved tremendously - but does anyone know exactly what else is being done differently? Hopefully no "enhancements" or "twiddling" ala the Yellow Submarine Songtrack CD?

All that said, I will no doubt be throwing my money down (again!!) regardless - I'm such a sad case. Matter of fact, I bought my very first CD player *specifically* for the release of the first four Fab albums on CD the following Tuesday.

gazzalfc · « **Reply #12 on:** April 8, 2009, 05:55:50 PM »

Way. On my birthday too

Phil M · « **Reply #13 on:** April 8, 2009, 06:05:13 PM »

sneak preview..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iF74bk3oxds

nutmeg94 · « **Reply #14 on:** April 8, 2009, 09:46:18 PM »

If I had the choice I would choose originals over remastered every time.

Scottish-Don · « **Reply #15 on:** April 9, 2009, 07:10:57 AM »

Quote from: gazzalfc on April 8, 2009, 05:55:50 PM

Way. On my birthday too

Call the Cops!!

FinnishRed · « **Reply #16 on:** April 9, 2009, 11:24:29 AM »

Quote from: nutmeg94 on April 8, 2009, 09:46:18 PM

If I had the choice I would choose originals over remastered every time.

Original LP's of course, but not original CD's. That's the point here. To get the sound quality of the CD versions better. The original LP's are naturally the real thing. But, I'd assume that not all Beatles fans these days want to start purchasing those vinyl versions of the albums. I just don't get it why everyone is saying there's no point remastering their catalogue.

Party Phil · « **Reply #17 on:** April 9, 2009, 11:31:32 AM »

Quote from: Phil M on April 8, 2009, 06:05:13 PM

sneak preview..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iF74bk3oxds

hahaha, what the fuck is that about?!

Paul · « **Reply #18 on:** April 9, 2009, 11:49:35 AM »

And yet you still can't get them on MP3

Phil M · « **Reply #19 on:** April 9, 2009, 01:39:47 PM »

Quote from: Party Phil on April 9, 2009, 11:31:32 AM

hahaha, what the fuck is that about?!

Steve Riks, he is a brilliant impressionist.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/jqbCoNCNKm8" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch/v/jqbCoNCNKm8</a>

'Dooooooh'

Dan86 · « **Reply #20 on:** April 9, 2009, 01:44:02 PM »

One more reason to download for free. Profiteering leaches.

shelovesyou · « **Reply #21 on:** April 10, 2009, 12:38:42 PM »

Quote from: FinnishRed on April 8, 2009, 02:46:03 PM

Well obviously a better sound quality for those who don't own all that corduroy. Other than that, they can earn a few bob again.

Earn a few more bob ? ? Not like they need it really and as for sound quality ? ? It hasnt done them much harm so far has it !!!

Pointless.

shelovesyou · « **Reply #22 on:** April 10, 2009, 12:39:47 PM »

Quote from: Paul on April 9, 2009, 11:49:35 AM

And yet you still can't get them on MP3

You can , you just need to know where to look .

Billy The Kid. · « **Reply #23 on:** April 10, 2009, 12:44:40 PM »

Its the biggest name any record company could have in their back catalogue, all they gotta do is remaster it, repackage it, distribute it, and hey presto, let the name make them squillions. Who needs A&R scouts when you've got the Beatles master tapes? It was only a matter of time before EMI done this

alfonso · « **Reply #24 on:** April 10, 2009, 01:07:44 PM »

How long have they (record companies) been releasing remastered CDs?

I can remember the Who had their catalogue done around 96.

EMI have been waiting for the right time to do this. Maybe there has been a drop in sales or something, so they'll roll this out and make a fortune.

For downloading their stuff. I prefer the vinyl rips.
The CD sound for their stuff sounds like a pile of shit. So for me a remaster is in order regarding the CDs.

Billy The Kid. · « **Reply #25 on:** April 10, 2009, 02:08:43 PM »

Quote from: alfonso on April 10, 2009, 01:07:44 PM

Maybe there has been a drop in sales or something, so they'll roll this out and make a fortune.

The last few years have been disasterous for EMI, they're only just starting to turn it around now, this will probably help alright

John_P · « **Reply #26 on:** April 10, 2009, 03:38:09 PM »

only just finished getting all there albums a few months ago, can't imagine I'll be rebuying them all, might get another copy of revolver though to see what the difference is.

Harry_Wong · « **Reply #27 on:** April 10, 2009, 03:42:13 PM »

"...for 09/09/09 release"

I wonder if that was chosen with the Lennon/#9 superstition in mind.

The relationship between John Lennon and the number 9

#9 and John Lennon

I thought all the original material had been released under The Rutles name anyway.

THE RUTLES - Piggy In The Middle (1967)

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/U1y9BIjTSVk&hl=en&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/U1y9BIjTSVk&hl=en&fs=1</a>

THE RUTLES - Get Up And Go (1969)

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/OF4LKc-zslo&hl=en&fs=1" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/OF4LKc-zslo&hl=en&fs=1</a>

shelovesyou · « **Reply #28 on:** April 10, 2009, 09:56:52 PM »

Quote from: Harry_Wong on April 10, 2009, 03:42:13 PM

"...for 09/09/09 release"

I wonder if that was chosen with the Lennon/#9 superstition in mind.

The relationship between John Lennon and the number 9

#9 and John Lennon

I thought all the original material had been released under The Rutles name anyway.

Definatley , without a doubt .

rafathegaffa83 · « **Reply #29 on:** April 14, 2009, 01:52:10 AM »

Are the albums going to be just the original running order, or will they include bonus tracks like the mid-90's remasters released by The Who and The Kinks? If the latter were to occur, I'd be interested to see Let It Be include the Let it Be "Naked" material

c0burn · « **Reply #30 on:** April 14, 2009, 02:52:15 AM »

There are some mad posts in this thread... Anyone who's into the Beatles, and I mean really into them knows the 1987 CD issues are crap for a number of reasons, in both fidelity and mixing choices. First four albums are in mono only, rest are in stereo for example. The '87 cd issues also changed the Stereo mixes of Help and Rubber Soul from the original LP's. What every Beatlemaniac's been clamouring for is all of them in both mono and stereo (except Abbey Road/Let It Be which have only been in Stereo). Great to see we'll get the Rubber Soul/Help Original Stereo, Original Mono and 87 Stereo Mixes.

The packaging is also gash on the 1987 cd issues. The new ones are replicas of the LP's and are fucking SEXY.

To the people moaning, the answer is ... stick with what you've got then.

Quote from: Veinticinco de Mayo on April 8, 2009, 01:32:46 PM

Flog that dead horse just one last time why dontcha...

Flogging would insinuate they have released them multiple times. This is the 2nd cd release ever, after the initial 1987 set. The Beatles catalogue has been incredibly protected.

Quote from: shelovesyouyehyehyeh on April 8, 2009, 02:15:50 PM

Whats the point in this really ? ?
Im a big beatles fan but this just seems a bit silly really
what is so wrong with whats been released already ? ?

The mono recordings are fantastic , drums in the left ear , Bass in the right ear = magic

Do you know what mono means?

Quote from: Djimis Telescopic Leg on April 8, 2009, 03:19:24 PM

"Remastered" albums are a crock of shit. In most cases they just turn the volume up because apparently "loud music sounds better" and lose any sense of the record's original dynamics. It's as if they don't trust the listener to use their volume knob and sacrifice sound quality as a result. Bizarre.

Have some faith, and a read of this...

http://www.tapeop.com/tapelog/2009/04/the-beatles-cds-get-remastered.php

Quote

In addition, de-noising technology, which is often associated with re-mastering, was to be used, but subtly and sparingly. Eventually, less than five of the 525 minutes of Beatles music was subjected to this process. Finally, as is common with today's music, overall limiting - to increase the volume level of the CD - has been used, but on the stereo versions only. However, it was unanimously agreed that because of the importance of The Beatles' music, limiting would be used moderately, so as to retain the original dynamics of the recordings.

Remaster when done properly can do absolute wonders for music.

Rant over.

Mouth · « **Reply #31 on:** April 14, 2009, 05:06:36 AM »

Quote from: FinnishRed on April 8, 2009, 01:14:19 PM

Thoughts? Going to buy the remastered versions of these classic albums?

No, I already shelled out for them once, if those copies are substandard I want my money back under the trade descriptions act!

Or they can just fuck off and I'll grab the flac copies when they get ripped.

ConnieLFC · « **Reply #32 on:** August 29, 2009, 12:46:19 AM »

I have to ask has anyone else shelled out for these? The mono box set is sold out pretty much everywhere over here in the US at this point and Amazon has already sold out of its stereo box allocation as well.

I initially missed c0burn's great post above - I'm really looking forward to getting my sets in two weeks. Kid in candy store time.

astowell1 · « **Reply #33 on:** August 29, 2009, 01:45:56 AM »

I for one am looking forward to this, I just hope I can afford it

Ron · « **Reply #34 on:** August 29, 2009, 02:13:49 PM »

Re-re-rematherfuckingmastered
What a fucking joke.

alfonso · « **Reply #35 on:** August 30, 2009, 10:03:51 AM »

the podcast on the amazon site was a good listen. The engineers explain the process and how the original albums were recorded etc.

It's about time these albums were given a sound to justify their quality.

One of the reasons I never bought their catalogue on CD was because I was waiting for them to be remastered.

Looking forward to hearing them

mig · « **Reply #36 on:** August 30, 2009, 10:22:46 AM »

Might actually bother getting into them now.

OLDIE · « **Reply #37 on:** August 30, 2009, 10:45:58 AM »

Quote from: shelovesyouyehyehyeh on April 8, 2009, 02:15:50 PM

Whats the point in this really ? ?

Money

Carras Left Foot · « **Reply #38 on:** August 30, 2009, 03:16:02 PM »

Can't wait, only got Mystery Tour on pre order though because I'm skint and already spent loads buying Beatles vinyl through the years.

FinnishRed · « **Reply #39 on:** August 30, 2009, 05:24:29 PM »

Quote from: Ron on August 29, 2009, 02:13:49 PM

Re-re-rematherfuckingmastered
What a fucking joke.

Why?

As I mentioned earlier, if you don't own the vinyl versions of the albums, then you'll get better sound quality this time with the remastered albums. So what's the joke then?