Beatles 2009 remastered series - comments?

Captain grumpy here - but what a disappointment.

Do not believe me?

In 1999 The Beatles released what was described at the time as the 'definitive' 'Yellow Submarine' CD Soundtrack & DVD video.
Three tracks come from the classic 'Revolver' album:

Love You To (1999 remix)
Eleanor Rigby (1999 remix)
Yellow Submarine (1999 remix)

These tracks were a complete transformation over their original 1960's (and mid 1980) LP/CD releases.
True stereo spread (as opposed to instruments on one side - vocals on the other).
Digitally cleaned up de-poped/hicked etc.
Promised (and delivered) 'Beatles from the studio into the home'.
Promised (and delivered) 'Beatles for the new millennium'.

The newly released 2009 remastered series - is a return to the old inferior remixes - taking the Beatles back from the 21st century and plunging them deep into the 1960's.

Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!

Definitive means definitive. To vastly improve something - only to rerelease the version before last is wrong!

And while I am on my soapbox, why two CD sets? One Stereo and one mono?

Surely there is enough space on a CD to hold both stereo and mono mixes - but why release one set, when the real numpties will buy two?

Seb - where are you when we need you?

... thanks for the warning! Haha.

PS:

Compare 1999 'Yellow Submarine' songtrack CD to the just released 2009 version.
Honestly: Which is the better version?

I have neither, and I am now too afraid to pay to hear the comparison.  Hahaha.
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]I return the floor to the rest of you.[/QUOTE]

That would be sickening.  But although i love the Beetles, I am not paying for new new releases (even though I don't have a huge amount of their stuff, much as I love it).  Hmm, maybe QP aren't the only ones out for money?

I've read nothing but good reviews......so I'm sorry at your disappointment, John.

I only see myself getting the first four 'albums' (since the originals are all mono), and then moving on up to 'Sgt Pepper' much later.   How do these rate?  The first four HAVE to be better.  Same with 'Rubber Soul' (just to have the vocals spread out rather than the annoying same channel throughout).

As to cashing in......they did the Anthology series (terrific, would have enjoyed more), the BBC recordings (nice addition), Yellow Sub (improvement), "1" (nothing great, but good), and the 'Let It Be....Naked' (terrific).

That's it!   No umpteen greatest hits mish mashes that the Elvis and Sinatra estates have milked the cow on.  Or all the new and improved remixes that Deep Purple and others are guilty off (how many different ANATO, ADATR, NOTW and Queen GHs exist now?)

I understand the separate mono releases.  I do wish those were made available individually, and at a price around $10 USD, not $300 for a limited edition box set.  Only 'Sgt Pepper' and 'The Beatles' in mono have any personal interest.

Thanks in advance.

Abbey Road has never sounded better.  It is a significant improvement to my ears.

But from what I've read, A Hard Day's Night is the most drastic improvement of them all.

Well now I'm conflicted!
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]Come on audiophiles, spit it out!  What's changed?[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]
[/QUOTE]I've heard the lead vocals have a lot more presence (the review I read suggested maybe a little too much so, like John is sitting right next to you or something - not that I'd really complain).[/QUOTE]

Has anyone bought the mono box? It's selling out fast and I am undecided. I buy the stereo box anyway for the DVD and commentaries but I think the mono box must be worth having, too...

On CNN we can hear 2 small samples comparing the 1987 versions to the new remasters

[url=http://edition.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Music/09/09/remastered.beatles.review/index.html]http://edition.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Music/09/09/remastered.beatles.review/index.html[/url]

"Money" sounds very different because the acoustic guitar is not so prominent anymore but is it better or just different? The difference of the "Dear Prudence" mixes is not so evident as in "Money".

It does make my head spin a bit.  What now counts as 'definitive'?  The ones made by the band using technology of the time? Remixes approved by surviving members of the band?

I ask the same question. Certainly the 1987 mixes are not the end-all because at the time the technology was not that advanced but who defines what is the best mix...

It's bit of a grey area when one likes to look at music or film as an art form.  A remix that changes the nature of the piece, I mean ...  ha!  Just realised how pretentious I'm sounding, and I suppose for the average listener it's no big deal.

I've just checked beatles.com/store

The mono box set is retailing at £199.99 and the stereo box set is retailing at £169.99.

There appears to be no difference in content apart from the obvious.So why the £30 difference?

I am interested in buying the stereo albums of 1963 and 1964. Those should be quite good.

My dad will buy the boxset, I can't afford Rockband and the boxset. I prefer to buy them seperately.

[b]Godco[/b]: Rubber Soul is a disappointment. Pepper is the same. They both contain that annoying split channel stereo, and not a patch on the 1999 remixes.  
No true stereo spread at all.

I understand that some will prefer this - as this was the original recording. But the idea was to improve the original recording, and it doesn't.
My advice save your money and avoid the hype.

Trust in the force Luke - which do you prefer?