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

See, the "Get Back" footage could be fashioned into a remake of "Hard Days Night".

Mal = Shake
Glyn = Norm
Yoko = Grandad

In which George (not Ringo) gets a bit put out and feels underappreciated and walks out.
Where Yoko (in a mostly silent part) tells John he could be doing so much more than this...
Where the Movie Producer (as opposed to Henry Spinetti) keeps having kittens because his wonderful ideas keep getting knocked back and the show looks like it won't happen or some such
And, at the end, the band get together and play songs and everyone is happy.

think the stereo versions of all their albums, even the early ones, are the ones available digitally, including on streaming

One early one where I do like the stereo version is Beatles For Sale

lol that No Reply first take! i've never really spent much time with Anth1, I only owned 2 and 3 and was convinced 1 was mostly spoken word clips. apart from the laughs, it's really interesting to hear it with just a sort of "basic Beatles sound" run-through to get the idea across, before any real shaping of the song or finding its points of emphasis and transition.

thinking about the period of endless suffering experienced by millions waiting for the Beatles catalogue to be remastered: mannnn did they leave a lot of hard-to-count money on the table with the 1987 CDs, by going with the UK packaging/tracklists. very obviously the correct decision artistically, but surely a disaster in nostalgia-shopping terms. my parents owned zero of those CDs and would have been right in the target market for like, a 12" tall box set with all the US discs in individual CDs, the black-and-rainbow Capitol label prominently featured, a big booklet with all the art from all the 7" singles, photos of Beatle wigs and toys and all that stuff... just one big giant nostalgia package, a major holiday-shopping splurge.

what they did obviously sold very well, but i wonder how many millions of copies they *didn't* sell to people who just wanted to put on their beloved favorite "The Beatles' Second Album" and remember what it felt like being 13 and head over heels for Ringo, etc. etc.

Contend that the LIB guitar solo on the album is the superior one, the way it screams out of the chord bed instead of mellowing out in it

is this even up for debate? is there someone out there who would rep for another take?

That was in response to my post that the single version is better, including the guitar solo

Yeah, the US albums didn't get reissued on CD until 2004 (The Capitol Albums, Vol. 1), and I think the mixes/masters weren't all correct in that they didn't have the crazy fake stereo and added reverb. It wasn't until 2014 that the discs were issued individually. I only have the Second Album CD, which was very well done. But the Beatles themselves may have initially (in 1987) wanted to consign the US albums to the dustbin of history, maybe not realizing the attachment American fans had to those specific track sequences and mixes.

xp

for sure. and again - it's artistically the right call. it might only be in hindsight that it's apparent they could have easily gotten away with doing the Capitol Albums type box in 1987, while simultaneously assuring record-collector die-hard types "FYI, we'll be doing another issue of the UK sequences next year" or something. idk.

but i guess they really wanted to correct the record with the general public of Beatlemaniacs, and not actually let them retain their old version of things. oh well.

The 1987 Beatles CD rollout really was exemplary in terms of comprehensiveness - here's all the albums in their original order, and all the singles and stragglers on two bonus CDs.
Also, no-one except old LP collectors were talking about the value of mono mixes in 1987, so it was quite bold to release the first four albums in that format. The Rubber Soul and Revolver stereo remixes were arguable.

for sure. and again - it's artistically the right call. it might only be in hindsight that it's apparent they could have easily gotten away with doing the Capitol Albums type box in 1987, while simultaneously assuring record-collector die-hard types "FYI, we'll be doing another issue of the UK sequences next year" or something. idk.

― I Am Fribbulus (Xax) (Doctor Casino), Wednesday, December 8, 2021 9:29 AM (ten minutes ago) bookmarkflaglink

I think in 1987 -- when millions were buying CDs for the first time -- releasing multiple versions of one album would've been seen as an absolutely insane cash-grab, and may have backfired somewhat. CDs cost almost double what LPs cost at the time, and someone wanting both With The Beatles and Meet The Beatles! would be pretty pissed at having to buy two $17 CDs with a lot of the same songs.

anthology 1's listenability is lower than the other two but i still kinda love it, especially the end of the first disc/beginning of the second disc when ringo enters and you can really hear them kicking into gear. bunch of amazing fun live takes of the songs. but, as evidenced by that "no reply" demo, the beatles for sale demos/outtakes toward the end of disc 2 are the big highlight (cf. "mr. moonlight" with a hella dissonant harrison(?) solo instead of george martin on organ)

the recording of "kansas city" that closes it out is arguably better than what made the record

The '87 CDs were also released with a gradual rollout over the calendar year and priority given to Sgt. Pepper landing in the most deluxe version of the set (actual session info & notes in the booklet!) on its 20th anniversary.

great point about the price of CDs at that time. but someone actually wanting both With the Beatles and Meet the Beatles is a pretty small niche, right? i'm not saying i actually want to live in this universe i'm describing, which would have just extended the Capitol albums confusion, and the necessity of FAQs, for another generation. it's just interesting to me they didn't go that route. my Mom never bought any of the CDs but i bet she might have bought Meet the Beatles and Beatles '65, etc.

lol Brad ty for pointing me to this version of "Mister Moonlight" and that solo, omg

i've always been one of the very small minority of fans who like "Mister Moonlight" but this is a lot closer to the hapless, ill-advised failure that most people find in the released version.

It's funny, because EMI made some versions of the US format albums for the US forces stationed in Europe, nice on "Parlophone" - quite collectable ....

I have one of them, "Beatles VI". I don't think it matches the US mix, but it does match the content (i.e. the song list).

but someone actually wanting both With the Beatles and Meet the Beatles is a pretty small niche, right?

Oh, no doubt. And I can't imagine too many people wanted the US soundtracks on CD, with all their instrumental filler. But there probably could've been some kind of middle ground, like maybe putting two or three of the US albums on one disc (which wouldn't have been difficult, since most of those early US albums were under 30 minutes).

Anthology 1 also has Royal Variety Performance of ". . . Til There Was You" (in front of the Queen), which leads into this cheeky bit by John (starts at :53) and a great Twist and Shout:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvBCmY7wAAU

Also, no-one except old LP collectors were talking about the value of mono mixes in 1987, so it was quite bold to release the first four albums in that format. The Rubber Soul and Revolver stereo remixes were arguable.

I expect we’ll get a Giles Martin remix soon enough.

.. and some of the mono CDs had the "original" stereo mixes added !

Yeah, Help! and Rubber Soul in the mono box have both the mono mix and the 1965 stereo mix.

I have not bothered sorting out the differences. Should I bother at this point?

lmao the beatles catalog: one of the most confusing catalogs of all time

when the mono box came out, i ripped all the mono mixes from please please me -> sgt. pepper's and have never looked back. giles' stereo remix of sgt. pepper's was fun tho

I love the mini Emitex sleeves in the mono CD box. That whole set is like Beatles origami.

The only album that I like having in stereo and mono is the White Album. Otherwise, I'm good with mono (and stereo if that's there is no mono, e.g. Abbey Road, Get Back/Let It Be, etc.)

*I'm good with mono (except for the obvious cases where only stereo exists, eg. Abbey Road, Get Back/Let It Be, etc.)

i used to have white album in both but the stereo is way more canonical to me

I definitely prefer the stereo white album, and I have to wonder if more care was taken with that stereo mix, rather than it being the afterthought that it was on previous records. After all, "Revolution 9" was mixed in stereo, and the mono is just a fold-down.

So the albums on Spotify are stereo except for the songs in the Mono Masters box?

So the albums on Spotify are stereo except for the songs in the Mono Masters box?

Probably. When everything was remastered for 2009, they streamlined it so that stereo was the priority for the standalone releases. Mono was treated like it was for collectors and reserved only for the box set.

What's confusing is that in 1987, George Martin remixed Help! and Rubber Soul because he thought the original stereo mixes sounded lacking. Those 1987 digital remixes for those two albums were retained for the 2009 remasters, but for completeness sake, they also included the original stereo mixes in the mono box set. Because those albums were so short, they were able to just append the original stereo mixes to the original mono mixes on the same disc, so the number of CD's in the mono box set didn't change. (It's just weird to have these stereo mixes pop up on a box set that was marketed as mono only, but it's still consumer friendly.)

I definitely prefer the stereo white album, and I have to wonder if more care was taken with that stereo mix, rather than it being the afterthought that it was on previous records. After all, "Revolution 9" was mixed in stereo, and the mono is just a fold-down.

I posted this way, way upthread somewhere, but Ken Scott claimed the White Album was the only time they put some real thought into both the mono AND stereo mixes of an album. The reason: Paul got so many fan letters about how the mono and stereo mixes were different (probably without his knowledge because he didn't care about stereo) that he told Ken that they need to play up the differences between both mixes, the idea being more people will buy both mixes for that reason. Ah Paul...

*probably done without his knowledge because he didn't care about stereo

Ah, that makes sense, and the white album feels like it has the most, and most significant, differences between stereo and mono.

Engineer Ken Scott on mono vs stereo with the White Album:

https://www.guitarworld.com/news/abbey-road-engineer-ken-scott-says-beatles-white-album-sessions-were-blast

Q: Did you do the mono mixes for Magical Mystery Tour and the White Album? And why are the mono and stereo mixes so different?

A: Absolutely. Normally we went to mono first. Up until the White Album, they had never been interested in stereo. But they became interested around that time. Paul told me they wanted to make the stereo mixes different from the mono mixes because they’d started to get fan mail about how people were buying both the mono and stereo mixes.

Fans were sending The Beatles letters, telling them how the mixes were different. So they realized this was a good way of selling double the amount of albums. So we had to actually make stereo mixes that were different.

Up until the White Album, the stereo mixes were throwaways. England just wasn’t interested in stereo mixes. So they were done a little later, and we didn’t take massive amounts of notes. So if something was sped up, no one actually kept a note on how much it was sped up. It was just, “Oh, just speed it up a bit.” They were just thrown together, really.

-----------

https://thestrangebrew.co.uk/ken-scott-on-the-beatles-white-album/

Q: The White Album was the first album specifically mixed for stereo as well as mono. How did the mixing process vary? The mono and stereo versions are very different at times like on ‘Helter Skelter’ and ‘While My Guitar Gently Weeps’.

A: As people in England were still not into stereo up to this point, more expensive equipment needed to play it AND record companies charged more for stereo, the Beatles had only been in the studio for the mono mixes. They are the only ones they approved and stereo mixes were left until a short time after the completion of all recording and too often things that the Beatles had wanted and were done for the mono mixes were forgotten when it came to the stereo mixes. “She’s Leaving Home” is a great example of this. But for the White album the stereo mixes were often done immediately after the mono version with differences requested by the band members. I was told by Paul that the reason for this was that they had been receiving fan mail telling them how much the fans liked the differences and so they thought they might sell even more records by purposely changing things between mixes.

-----------

https://www.premierguitar.com/diy/interview-ken-scott-part-2-musicians-questions-about-recording-with-the-beatles

Q: Do you prefer the mono mixes on the White Album to the stereo ones?

A: Probably. I’m still awaiting the mono re-masters from EMI, and I have yet to hear them. [This was in 2009 when the remasters were being rolled out - Ken had heard the stereo remasters but not the mono ones yet.] From what I remember, yes, because that’s what we spent all the time on. On the White Album they became interested in stereo mixes, because fans would buy both versions and write and tell them of all the differences, so they began making mono and stereo mixes with planned differences.

So the albums on Spotify are stereo except for the songs in the Mono Masters box?

Mono Masters isn't on Spotify, is it? I think the only mono album on Spotify may actually be Sgt Pepper, as disc 4 of the super deluxe edition (though it's not marked as mono on Spotify)

Giles Martin on the challenges of remixing Rubber Soul and Revolver:

"The software is getting a lot better," Martin notes. "I’m constantly looking at how we would approach it if I ever get to remix Revolver or Rubber Soul, early albums, which a lot of people want me to do. That’s a good example of, 'How do we do that?' How do I make sure that John or Paul’s vocal isn’t just in the right-hand speaker, but also make sure that his guitar doesn’t follow him if I put it in the centre? On Taxman, the guitar, the bass, and drums are all on one track! That’s why the record is basically on the left-hand side, and then there’s a shaker on the right-hand side of the centre.

https://www.musicradar.com/news/beatles-revolver-rubber-soul

That explains a lot. After hearing the mono mixes, I lost interest in the stereo mixes fast. The spread was just too awkward, very lop-sided and with gaping holes all over the place.

On headphones, the early stereo mixes are a pain. It's less noticeable through speakers.

That was in response to my post that the single version is better, including the guitar solo

― Halfway there but for you, Wednesday, December 8, 2021

I thought you said they were "correct," which I can understand. I can even understand an idiosyncratic personal fondness for the version first imprinted. "better" tho... just can't get my head around it.

I took a little one-speaker jam box to camp with me one summer and all the Beatles records taped off on to cassette.

It wasn't until I got there that I realized that for some reason, the album wouldn't all play through the one speaker, like an artificial mono (imagine someone playing you a stereo record over the phone.) Instead, I only got one of the two channels.

It was a long two weeks.

oooooooff

Ouch

Any takers on this thread for the theory that they sing the word “nonpareil” on “Kansas City”?

I really dig the mono version of Help! - It's faster and has a different, rougher lead vocal. Was redone due to some sort of syncing with the film issues. The fidelity of the link below sucks, but it's the best thing available online:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXvE1oHVZaQ

I thought my headphones were unplugged and it was playing from the speakers when I clicked that!

(They weren't. Just sounded that way.)

I know, right!?

Also, if you all missed the POB reissue that came out earlier this year, there's a bunch of great stuff that makes for a good addendum to Get Back:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aBmaFkyDk0

Crazy in retrospect how 1970 produced FIVE albums of all-new material from the Beatles. Granted Ringo's was covers/standards and a lot of Paul's feels tossed off, but still it's a ridiculous bounty for Beatle fans, and John and George's albums are still the two best solo albums.