|
|
Post by Kiwi on Sept 9, 2009 8:34:36 GMT -4
I only heard about these new remasters 10 hours ago. There was a good article on our TV3 evening news and a national retailer is selling them for NZ$23.99, which is much cheaper than the previous issues have been at times. I often thought them overpriced. Thanks to Ginnie's recommendation I bought most of their CDs last year, having enjoyed the Beatles in my youth and having owned many of their LPs and singles, but I never bought their CDs. What I'd like to know is, are the new remasters really an improvement and do they compare well with vinyl, or have they been compressed and had their sound ruined? We discussed compression in the previous Music Talk thread. In the post before that one of Ginnie's, I commented on how rubbishy the sound of many Buddy Holly CDs is compared to 30-year-old, or even older, vinyl. Fortunately, I recently tried a new double CD, "The Very Best of Buddy Holly and The Crickets" and to my great surprise, out of it's 50 tracks there are about 20 which are either as good as or at least similar to the sound quality of the vinyl, or, believe it or not, actually better! |
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Sept 9, 2009 9:41:13 GMT -4
From what I understand, the quality is marginally better, and will only make a real difference to those who listen to the albums with higher-end sound systems (as opposed to your regular computer speakers). If you're the type that likes to put a CD in the car's radio system and sing along while driving to work, then the "old" versions will do just fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Sept 9, 2009 18:39:04 GMT -4
I haven't heard them in CD format. Someone gave them to me in flac format on a DVD but I can't compare them to CD because I'm using my cheap soundcard against a CD player for comparision.
(BTW I didn't ask for the DVD - I've already bought every Beatle album on vinyl and most of them again on CD. )
|
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Sept 9, 2009 19:34:45 GMT -4
I am considering buying the collection... but it's $230. For the amount of music etc. it's probably worth the price, it's just hard to part with that much money at one time. I realized after looking at the track list that I'm really only familiar with a small part of their discography. That alone would probably make buying the collection worthwhile.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Sept 9, 2009 22:43:26 GMT -4
I am considering buying the collection... but it's $230. For the amount of music etc. it's probably worth the price, it's just hard to part with that much money at one time. I realized after looking at the track list that I'm really only familiar with a small part of their discography. That alone would probably make buying the collection worthwhile. $189 on Amazon.ca and individual cd's $12.99 at HMV - gee I paid almost $25 for my Beatle CD's years ago! I think I know the Beatles music inside and out by now - I must be older than you LO. I remember listening to "All My Loving" when it first came out.  Maybe I'll purchase the remastered albums I don't have on Cd - I don't think I'll buy Sgt. Peppers and others a third time! |
|
|
|
Post by LunarOrbit on Sept 10, 2009 0:19:35 GMT -4
I was born in 1975 so I missed The Beatles, but I've always enjoyed their music. Some of their songs just don't get as much radio play so I'm sure there are some I've never heard before. I don't think I heard "Dig a Pony" until a few weeks ago.
The Amazon.ca price is MUCH better than Best Buy's. I better make up my mind quick, I guess, because it probably won't stay that price.
|
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Sept 10, 2009 9:07:07 GMT -4
I absolutely love the Beatles - they're one of my favorite bands and being the music buff I am I would love to own the newly remastered versions. The problem is that it's very expensive, and being a student who just started out I can't spend too much money on luxuries. But if I were a rich man, I would've bought the box for sure.
|
|
|
|
Post by homobibiens on Sept 10, 2009 9:12:15 GMT -4
I absolutely love the Beatles - they're one of my favorite bands and being the music buff I am I would love to own the newly remastered versions. The problem is that it's very expensive, and being a student who just started out I can't spend too much money on luxuries. But if I were a rich man, I would've bought the box for sure. How complete is the new box? I've got a bunch of Beatles on old-fashioned vinyl, and one of the same albums also on CD. |
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Sept 10, 2009 20:52:20 GMT -4
I absolutely love the Beatles - they're one of my favorite bands and being the music buff I am I would love to own the newly remastered versions. The problem is that it's very expensive, and being a student who just started out I can't spend too much money on luxuries. But if I were a rich man, I would've bought the box for sure. How complete is the new box? I've got a bunch of Beatles on old-fashioned vinyl, and one of the same albums also on CD. I think as complete as it gets - all original 13 albums plus some extras on DVD. You can buy the stereo set OR the mono/stereo version which is more expensive. |
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Sept 10, 2009 20:53:27 GMT -4
I don't think I heard "Dig a Pony" until a few weeks ago. I heard it in 1970. What a pup you are... ;D |
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Sept 11, 2009 8:08:31 GMT -4
BertL: Have you tried the 2006 album Love? It's great value and the retail prices I've seen in New Zealand are the lowest of any Beatle CDs. Mine cost NZ$13 new -- about US$9.
It has 26 tracks totalling 1:18:34, and is a special production by George Martin and his son Giles for a performance by Cirque du Soleil. They have altered, edited and combined tracks, and although that's something that purists don't usually like, in my opinion it is a real quality job and can only be described as "different" to the original tracks, but overall, certainly not inferior. George Martin knew what he was doing. I wouldn't be surprised if I made a close comparison with the originals and found some tracks I thought were better.
I was a little sceptical when I bought it, but trusted Martin and quickly took a liking to it. To give you an idea, the first track, "Because," from Abbey Road, consists of the vocals only. And those vocals are good! They sound more like they are sung by a choir than the Beatles. I recommend it to anyone who likes them.
|
|
|
|
Post by BertL on Sept 11, 2009 10:19:37 GMT -4
I actually have the LOVE album, and the remixes of some songs are amazing. I especially like the I Want You/She's So Heavy/For the Benefit of Mr. Kite mix, and the new versions of Lady Madonna, Hey Jude, All You Need is Love (finally a stereo version that is listenable to with headphones) and the new "John Lennon mix" of Strawberry Fields. In fact, pretty much every song is new and different, and really good to listen to. LOVE really is a good album, although of course it's more like a "Best Of Beatles - remixed" album than an original. Oh well, at least I've still got some early Beatles CDs, including a 2-disc collection of Beatles on the BBC Radio recordings.  |
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Sept 12, 2009 0:51:46 GMT -4
BertL: Have you tried the 2006 album Love? It's great value and the retail prices I've seen in New Zealand are the lowest of any Beatle CDs. Mine cost NZ$13 new -- about US$9. It has 26 tracks totalling 1:18:34, and is a special production by George Martin and his son Giles for a performance by Cirque du Soleil. They have altered, edited and combined tracks, and although that's something that purists don't usually like, in my opinion it is a real quality job and can only be described as "different" to the original tracks, but overall, certainly not inferior. George Martin knew what he was doing. I wouldn't be surprised if I made a close comparison with the originals and found some tracks I thought were better. I was a little sceptical when I bought it, but trusted Martin and quickly took a liking to it. To give you an idea, the first track, "Because," from Abbey Road, consists of the vocals only. And those vocals are good! They sound more like they are sung by a choir than the Beatles. I recommend it to anyone who likes them. I find that Love is more of a curiosity than anything else - its kind of entertaining but shouldn't be thought of as actual Beatle - its more of a cut and paste representation containing bits and pieces of their records reassembled. Not the real deal IMHO. |
|
|
|
Post by Kiwi on Sept 17, 2009 9:06:40 GMT -4
Does anyone know exactly which of the first few LPs were mono only and which were available in stereo? My vague memory is that only the first two released in New Zealand, Please Please Me and With The Beatles were mono only, so I was a bit surprised that the first CD I bought (being a Buddy Holly nut), Beatles For Sale, was mono. However, my memory isn't as trustworthy as it once was.  |
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Sept 17, 2009 17:09:39 GMT -4
Does anyone know exactly which of the first few LPs were mono only and which were available in stereo? My vague memory is that only the first two released in New Zealand, Please Please Me and With The Beatles were mono only, so I was a bit surprised that the first CD I bought (being a Buddy Holly nut), Beatles For Sale, was mono. However, my memory isn't as trustworthy as it once was. The first four were mono - Please Please Me With the Beatles A Hard Day's Night Beatles for Sale so anything after - beginning with Help! also be available in stereo. All albums were released after Beatles for Sale were released in stereo and mono up until Abbey Road which was the first one to have a stereo only release. Let it Be was stereo only also. So what do we have? Four albums mono only. Six (seven if you include Yellow Submarine) mono/stereo and the last two Stereo only. |
|
