I have had it up to here waiting for the Beatles catalogue to be remastered

now i'm confused.

me too!

Haven't heard this yet (still at the office) but Shakey's description makes it sound like something (fake) I heard before (grungy bass, no L&M voices, 12-odd minutes long)

yeah it's a series of fakes /bits of studio excerpts. there's no "Barcelona!" bit on it either.

not even any attempt to be convincing here, just trying to get their loop-based remixes an audience.

they are on the weird side & I must admit I enjoyed them. 'liverpool sound collage' should have been more like this.

oh sorry. the last track is the real attempt to trick us. neither convincing or interesting.

and overall segment 3 was the only one I enjoyed, the others not as much

god and if the cover image in the mp3 were high resolution enough, it'd be clear the name of this 'album' is 'Carnival of Light: Fakes, Frauds and Phonies'

I'm in the camp that's listened to all the multiple takes of 'What's The New Mary Jane' consecutively through, more than once -- I'm impatient for the original to finally make it out

i feel that same pain.

so it's a fake ? no use d/l it ?

If it was real, I'd be a huge deal and you'd read about it everywhere. Like an hour or so after that Revolution outtake leaked it was on pitchfork....

yeah this was some bullshit

Thank ypou for the Demonoid things - I got it eventually, just have to put it on DVDs now.

Also discovered many busty Russians in my area want to meet me.

so a hobo came in my store a while back and for some reason left a sealed copy of the abbey road remaster in the store and i'm guessing he stole it from the store across the street. i'll never know i guess. i never saw the guy again. cost 20 bucks! that's expensive. anyway, it sounds HORRIBLE. like, really really horrible. this is my first exposure to the beatles on cd and i think its my last. its honestly pretty much everything i hate about digital remastering all on one cd. yuck!

that's an interesting take, as the recent remasters were nearly universally praised for being the near-opposite of that (examples of modern digital remasters in which no-noise techniques are compression are used quite liberally). Ah well, to each...

ha yeah, the beatles remasters are great. scott may just be too much of a vinyl guy.

yeah, I'm curious as to what Scott found so offensive about them.

Maybe the Hobo remastered it, and wants to stir-up some sort of buzz in record stores before taking it to Apple inc.

I don't know how much I'd pay for the entire Beatles catalog remastered by Hobos'.

http://i9.photobucket.com/albums/a82/bobbysixer/hobos.jpg

Yeah, I love Scott and really value his thoughts, but after this revive I have to call into question whenever he says a CD sounds like crap. I think these remasters are a prime example of how they should be done.

if i can't turn a cd up really loud without it getting distorted then it sucks. end of story. and this is a very common complaint i have with remastered albums on cd. its not like i have some amazing hi-fi system here at the store, but i play a zillion records and CDs every day and get good sound out of it all the time. they made the cd soooooooooooo loud and i just kinda hate that. the bottom end is just a nightmare. maybe its just a bum copy. what do i know. i can't turn my stereo volume up to the halfway mark without the sound breaking up. and there is a low-level hiss in the background that is very audible. and the brassiness grates. i mean, i like cool digital drum sounds. but i like them on records recorded digitally on cumputers NOW. not an approximation of a digital drum sound on a record over 40 years old. man, the guitar in the intro to polythene pam, who remastered this, ross robinson? blah. i'd shell out for an old mfsl half-speed master on vinyl if i saw one somewhere. they sound great. cd people are strange! they should listen to this album the way it sounded when it came out. sounded great!

you should hear these sheffield lab/boston acoustics sampler CDs i picked up at a thrift store last week. from 1991. so cool! i mean the music sucks for the most part but the sound is cool. they put out a test cd that is nothing but snippets of jim keltner playing beats. need to find that one!

scott OTM

I won't argue that the original vinyl sounds way better, but his complaints about the remastered disc don't sound anything like my experience with them.

yeah, i mean, i haven't heard the vinyl on hi-fi equipment or anything, but to say these CDs sound bad doesn't seem right to me. abbey road sounds lush/gorgeous/full to my ears in the new remaster.

i've been rocking a 1991 cd copy of vagabonds of the western world by thin lizzy all day and it sounds fine. not as good as a nice vinyl copy, but its acceptable. bass is big and fat. i can turn it up loud. sounds good. they did a good job. "re-mastering by anthony hawkins" get that guy!

hey, the majority of the planet probably wants their music to sound like that remaster of abbey road. i understand. its what people are used to now. i just know what i prefer. the remaster is a different thing altogether. and i don't find it "better" in any way. so why would i listen to it? would love to hear a nice reel to reel copy.

I got two of the reissues and do like them both. Guitars and vocals on With the Beatlessound great. Bass and drums maybe not as present as you'd like, but that was a mixing issue. The other one is Help!, which is that '86 George Martin mix I'd never heard before and which sounds great!

Both strike me as warm sounding.

there are people who actually enjoy what iggy pop did to raw power! there are. even right here on ilm. i mean that just blows me away. that's like some sorta colossal generation gap or ear gap or something. i don't know what it is. i really wonder what digital sound has done to people's hearing sometimes. ear buds are killing our nation.

yeah, i'd actually like to hear what george martin did for CD. that would be interesting.

and my all-purpose dislaimer is: i like a LOT of CDs. i definitely have true favorites as far as great sound goes in the digital medium. mostly newer stuff that was created for the format. electronic stuff, naturally. but all kinds of stuff. the avant garde/experimental in general seemed to always be best at making a cd sound like heaven. sound people.

I dunno how ppl could say "Well Scott I don't know about that" if they haven't actually tried listening to it in the same way. We all think these CDs sound amazing...but for the most part, a lot of us say that *compared to the last batch of CDS*, and probably couldn't cite the cd in our collection that has the best sound quality because if we can hear it and it sounds clean then, that's where it ends for a lot of people, including me. There aren't many of us who are actually taking the sound quality on its own merits, or who spend as much time listening to vinyl. So I kind of like seeing what Scott has to say, and I do that knowing that I don't even have the tools to really disagree. And why should I?

I'm not saying "omg its Scott BOW DOWN" but I guess I was kind of surprised to see his take just dismissed out of hand the way it was.

oops sorry for talking abt you in the 3rd person, Scott :) I didn't see your other posts

Those are all valid criticisms, Scott. But I swear, I can hear a bazillion things on these remasters I NEVER heard on earlier masters. I mean go back to the original vinyl release of Abbey Road and listen for the pizzicato strings on the bridge of "Something". You can't hear them. You just can't!

I wasn't dismissing Scott at all! Just pointing out that it wasn't my experience with the remasters at all.

i wanted to like it. i'm not a hater. i thought i might be doing something wrong. like i needed a special high-def blu-ray cd player or something.

maybe its just a bum hobo copy. what do i know

the pizzicato strings on the bridge of "Something"

This reminds me of hearing the orchestra come in on "The End" on Anthology 3 and imagining what that would have sounded like if it had been mixed differently.

LOL, half way up? I have pretty decent equipment. I like things loud, trust me, but if I cranked any cd 50% my ears would be bleeding! But I realize you're in a store, which may be a bigger space. My B&W's get plenty of power from about 40%.

Anyways I'm pretty much a vinyl dork too. And I normally have the same complaints about modern cd's, new and remastered. The Beatles remasters however seem like the exception to the Loudness Wars rules.

It's enough to make me wonder if we're all talking about the same disc?! ;)

Hopefully any vinyl remasters will inspire consensus!

yeah, i dunno. this was the first beatles remaster i've listened to. it was made REALLY loud. my copy anyway. i knew when i put it on that i wouldn't be able to turn it up to 5 without it breaking up. and i was right. it was a test of sorts. i don't have a problem with any records at that level or most older CDs. newer CDs that are made like that though, i just toss. i like music loud. not all the time, but i like the option. my speakers in the store are huge. they might not be the greatest, but handling volume is not their problem. my receiver is decent too. i bought two slayer remasters at the stupid store across the street and i couldn't play them at all. the distortion was hideous. i mean, if you can't play a slayer album loud what's the point in living? i don't usually have that problem with new rap CDs actually. mostly new metal or hard rock.

But presumably, given that the Abbey Road CD is louder, it'd still be loud if you played it at a lower volume. I mean, that's obvious, but are you really getting more distortion at your normal listening level (i.e., not normal volume level you have on receiver but the actual volume level)?

Because I don't know why that would be unless it's maybe a compression issue.

The idea being that if something is really compressed flat, you'll get more constant distortion at whatever the max point would be on your system.

Wish I lived near your store, Scott. I'd bring by the mono cd's cos I'd love to hear your reaction to those!

I checked wave forms for The Beatles remasters way back when and none of them got close to digital zero and therefore clipping and digital distortion. So I'm surprised by this. Very surprised. Abbey Road is one of my least favourites so I don't know it as well as Revolver or MMT or Past Masters, but I'd be baffled if I put it on tonight and it distorted.

okay this was my fault. i had the loudness button on my receiver on and i turned it off and turned down the bass and treble and the volume and it sounds better now. sometimes i will hit the loudness button when i'm listening to vinyl and want that extra boost. cuz i'm a metal fan. definitely don't need it on for cds. especially a cd this loud already. still to digital-y for me though. hate the bottom end. yeah its neat to hear isolated stuff that stands out more on these digital versions of the songs. its fun what you can do with computers! they should make a batch that are guitar and drum heavy next. they can reconfigure this stuff a million different ways.
sorry for the confusion!

"Sorry, Scott, our bad!"

http://www.japan-zone.com/modern/pix/l/loudness.jpg

for real. i think it was actually the fault of this cassette:

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_h7zfRGoogHI/TIoAOhvIoBI/AAAAAAAABTY/VwAGyL4glOc/s1600/Monstrosity+(US)+-+Imperial+Doom.jpg

no good pictures of my receiver online. pioneer sound project 300.

http://www.canuckaudiomart.com/uploads/27/204699_thumb_ee1c431b35d5f501066387918382385e.jpg

the listening station in my store gets the good stuff:

http://chiobo.com/wp-content/uploads/classipress/marantz-receiver-616275446.jpg

loudness button = the aural caps lock key