advertisement


The Beatles - New Remastered Vinyl Stereo Box Set

Vuk,

Yeah, I saw the global warming thread. Just not up for a fight right now.

I don't really need more Beatles records, as I have The Beatles Collection on UK vinyl, as well as the mono CD box set that was released in 2009. But that new box set does look luverly.

Joe
 
I'm hesitating simply because the Mono CD box set really made me revisit a lot of the albums and fall in love again.

Is there a Mono re-release on the cards?
 
I ordered the boxset last night from Juno Records for £232.24 delivered (I had a unique 15% off voucher. Sadly though, it was linked to my account, so I wasn't able to share it here). Anyway, if you buy from Juno via ebay, you can get it for £270.67 delivered. That's the best price I've seen for it. The Item Number @ ebay is: 181020920071.

It occurred to me that I got The Beatles vinyl boxset for less than some paid for three Pink Floyd Immersion Boxsets which contained a few bits of tat for a lot of cash. Compared to that, The Beatles boxset, even at £270.67 delivered, seems like good value indeed!
 
Beats me why anybody would want to buy this set. Yes it LOOKS pretty, but you're not getting the advantage of the LP medium in terms of full analogue playback chain from the album mastertapes. And isn't that why one would still be buying an LP in this day/age? Or at least one cut from a high-res source. Plus these have been transferred to vinyl via a Benchmark DAC1! A good DAC in its time but hardly state of the art now. Even if the 'perfect' record player existed, you're not going to get better playback quality from this set than a 24/44.1 file played through a Benchmark DAC1. The quality level is fixed there, and won't magically sound better than a digital release of the same just because it's on an LP. In reality the errors introduced by the analgue LP playback process will reduce the sound quality further. Far better (IMHO) to go for the 24/44.1 Beatles 'Apple' USB set instead played back through a decent DAC, even with the (very) slight bit of limiting that was used on it. These new LPs are a weird hybrid - neither displaying the best traits of an analogue medium, nor a digital sourced one either...

Apple/EMI dropped the ball on this set, IMHO. You can still get a mint all-analogue BC-13 box set for less than this new set is going for.
 
quad2fan said:
Beats me why anybody would want to buy this set.
Click to expand...

Because it's beautifully put together and, despite it not being the ne plus ultra demanded by audiophile neurosis, it will sound absolutely wonderful. As did the CD masters from a couple of years back. Sometimes it's worth not stressing about whether things can sound a tiny bit better. Actually, it's never worth stressing about that.
 
Joe P said:
John,


That's interesting -- so the digital format with >90db dynamic range is intentionally limited, while the analogue format with less inherent dynamic range is not.

It is truly a crazy world.

Joe
Click to expand...

My understanding is that the 2009 stereo box was limited, the 2009 mono box was not. Isn't it the trend to make recordings louder that many audiophiles dislike, I know I have bought some of these and do not like them.

I'm disappointed reading about the complaints regarding the pressing quality of the US releases and hope the quality is better for the Mono Box. It must be a nightmare for the retailers.
 
windhoek said:
For me, if it makes me want to tap my toes and sing along (albeit in an out of key sort of way), then it's a worthwhile buy. That's it.
Click to expand...

I guess you're right, but then why bother with the LP? You'll get (very good) digital sound, but with extra ticks/pops from the LP medium. Perhaps I'm being too black & white here, but if it's a digital source I'd prefer to have those exact files as a download or a DVD. Likewise if it's a fully analogue source I'd like that preserved as best as is possible on an LP (since unfortunately R2R never took off, so for best analogue playback we were left with the LP).

A LOT of effort has obviously gone into the packaging & mastering on these and I expect them to sound v.good. Plus Sean Magee is a great guy and a real pro. But I wish they'd gone that extra mile (how often do they re-release the entire Beatles back catalogue?!) for all analogue releases for the LPs. Otherwise, when you get down to it, why bother releasing this project on LPs at all? Stick to an all-digital medium with no degradation of the 24/44.1 source files.
 
John said:
My understanding is that the 2009 stereo box was limited, the 2009 mono box was not. Isn't it the trend to make recordings louder that many audiophiles dislike, I know I have bought some of these and do not like them.
Click to expand...

IMO the limiting is very gentle and tastefully done....we're not talking the Red hot Chilli Peppers' school of compression here. I have the Mono CD set...today i was listening to the original stereo mix of Rubber Soul (which is in the Mono set not the Stereo set), sounded superb...better than my BC-13 of the same.
 
Martin M said:
IMO the limiting is very gentle and tastefully done....we're not talking the Red hot Chilli Peppers' school of compression here. I have the Mono CD set...today i was listening to the original stereo mix of Rubber Soul (which is in the Mono set not the Stereo set), sounded superb...better than my BC-13 of the same.
Click to expand...

It was confirmed by one of the engineers (and I cannot find the link now - typical!) that the bonus original stereo versions of Rubber Soul and Help! on the Mono CD set were also not limited in anyway. The bass on these is a lot more natural than the other 2009 stereo CDs, which, in my opinion, have a little too much bass EQ applied, and sound a little 'airbrushed' or soft to me. Still very good though, it's just that the two stereo albums in the mono box show what might have been for the entire stereo catalogue.
 
What's the consensus on which is the best Revolver? I started listening to the stereo cd this morning and Taxman is quite strange; its pretty much all happening in the left channel until suddenly a guitar comes in on the right. I would guess this is best in mono but other songs better in stereo. After than it sounded really good. I wonder if the ideal would require a special personal mix of the album with some tracks in mono and some in stereo.
 
Reading through the comments following that Fremer interview makes me very glad I'm not an audiophile. Those guys are completely neurotic.
 
sideshowbob said:
Reading through the comments following that Fremer interview makes me very glad I'm not an audiophile. Those guys are completely neurotic.
Click to expand...

most of us are here because we're slightly neurotic, if you like. IMO, striving for perfection, which was not that difficult to achieve here, is not such a bad thing. clearly, this effort was mainly about making some money. i can understand why people are so disappointed.



vuk.
 
But the records will sound fantastic, there is no doubt about that. The neurosis is the absurdity of always wanting something slightly better, absolutely regardless of the qualities of what one is actually listening to. Some pillock describes the 24/44 source used for these pressings as "low resolution". Sorry, but that is just complete stupidity. No wonder audiophiles are considered weird. They have no sense of perspective. They obsess about things which simply don't matter, or don't even exist. It's not a charming form of OCD, it's a waste of one's short time on earth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top