Beatles forums > Remasters
Where do you stand on this ?
peterbell1:
--- Quote from: tkitna on July 22, 2011, 01:20:44 PM ---Are the originals even avaliable anymore? I would think that the stereo remasters would be the default CD at this point. Kind of silly for a company to remaster a catalog and offer both versions (not talking about mono here).
--- End quote ---
I don't think it's silly to have both versions available when the "remastering" has also involved some tinkering with the original mixes.
Gary910:
I personally am glad that the 1987 CDs are out of print, and thus you can't buy them. They sound like crap. They sound like you have a blanket on your speakers.
I do like the new remasters. I do think they are mastered a little loud though. If you want to hear The Beatles really well, get a MFSL box. Yes, it is vinyl. Very warm, clear and they sound good. Or on CD, get a 1984 Japanese "Abbey Road", it too sounds really good. The Dr Ebbetts needle drops are good.
The record companies, and bands move on. They are always looking to make money.
I like what McCartney is doing with his catalog. I like the Hi-Res versions, and that they are offered in two formats (Un-Limited and Limited).
I think if you are stuck defending the 1987 CDs, you don't know what you are listening for. If you think the original mixes (not the 1987 vinyl (digital) mixes) on vinyl should still be available, I agree.
Hombre_de_ningun_lugar:
--- Quote from: Gary910 on July 22, 2011, 01:52:00 PM ---I think if you are stuck defending the 1987 CDs, you don't know what you are listening for. If you think the original mixes (not the 1987 vinyl (digital) mixes) on vinyl should still be available, I agree.
--- End quote ---
Personally I think that the 1987 CDs sound good enough for me. The remasters may have a better quality, a more clean sound, but somehow I find that music lost some of its magic with them. I always tend to prefer what was done before, the classic stuff.
Gary910:
--- Quote from: Hombre_de_ningun_lugar on July 22, 2011, 02:43:06 PM ---Personally I think that the 1987 CDs sound good enough for me. The remasters may have a better quality, a more clean sound, but somehow I find that music lost some of its magic with them. I always tend to prefer what was done before, the classic stuff.
--- End quote ---
Your post proves that listening to music is probably one of the most subjective things we, as humans, do. That, in turn, proving my point that there is no such thing as "The Best... (song, album, Beatle, etc.)."
Hombre_de_ningun_lugar:
--- Quote from: Gary910 on July 22, 2011, 05:19:29 PM ---Your post proves that listening to music is probably one of the most subjective things we, as humans, do. That, in turn, proving my point that there is no such thing as "The Best... (song, album, Beatle, etc.)."
--- End quote ---
Of course it's all subjective. And I'm not against the remasters, they may mean an improvement, but I've heard them and I just don't think they deserve to replace my old CDs, which sound good enough in the equipment I use. I love the Beatles as much or more than any fan, but I don't spend my money on anything with them on the label.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version