Beatles remasters 2009 Are They Worth It? Part 2

With a little luck (geddit?!) you'll get better audio here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ll3rhRmvzIA&fmt=18

A "cut 'n' shut" comparison of the 2009, 1987/88 and vinyl version of Let It Be. The iMac soundcard reveals precious little difference between the CD versions, whilst the vinyl is brighter, but not as loud. Despite this, I prefer the vinyl edition, which is why I let it play through to the end! It's possible to almost "see" Paul playing the piano to his left, with a sideways on profile. The Cd's make it seem too far away, like he has very long arms! That is an American pressing from 1967-70 LP by the way. The others are standard editions of of Past Masters Vol2 (1987/8) and Past Masters 2009.

Category:

Music

Tags:

• Beatles
• remasters
• Part
• Let
• It
• Be
• 2009
• Past
• Masters
• John
• Paul
• George
• Ringo
• 1987
• 1988
• 1970
• 1967
• 67-70
• Apple
• Logic
• Express
• Rega
• P5

[soundman4545]

To do a correct comparison with the album, you need to find a first pressing of it.

[MarkPMus]

@soundman4545 Point taken, but I am doing a general comparison with whatever is freely available. I would also need a much more sophisticated parallel tracking record player with £15k worth of arm and cartridge but this is a real world test, being posted on YT which does its own fair share of audio barbarianism! It continues from part 1, where my message is, nothing beats the LP's.

[wodrummerworld]

it seems the bottom line is that the vinyl record LP and good turntable and hi fi system are worth it, or on a modest budget the 2009 remake is worth it. it's a shame those original cd's didn't have the quality of the record played on a real good system. except price-wise. okay, looks like I'm going around in circles here. You have a NICE TURNTABLE and system, maybe that's the bottom line.

[MarkPMus]

Well any CD or record will obviously sound better on a high end system. My 1987 Beatles CD's sounded very harsh on my first Realistic/Tandy hi-fi separate CD player. On better equipment I have grown to appreciate them. So really my 2009 remaster bottom line is, "don't expect the sonic earth to move if your equipment is not capable of revealing it!" The best a CD/Radio/Cassette machine could offer is something that sounded barely passable and wouldn't hint at any of the joys on the CD!

[MOJOMAN54]

I bought the Beatles Stereo box but the Mono is out of my reach.Iv'e not heard people talking about the Capitol US album box sets that have Mono cuts on.

[MarkPMus]

The US cuts will likely be different mixes of the mono songs. Often Capitol wanted the songs before they were ready for release in the UK, hence the differences. As such, the US mixes will be of interest to those who just own the UK releases.

[zeromant80]

I prefer the Mono remaster boxset (2009) over the stereo one

[MusicalGold]

The Annoying Wisper is gone!

[THEwilliamcheek]

Haha, I dearly love vinyl, but I thinks your turntable here is just a leeetle bit quick (=brightness!).

[floydpink2222]

This Remasters are the best

No loudness war on this

pitchfork(dot)com/reviews/albu­ms/13425-stereo-box-in-mono/

[tystnu]

@floydpink2222 actually, I haven't heard them on proper eqipment on vinyl so I can't really tell. If they use the same mix for digital as for the vinyl edition, i'm quite sure that the digital format will conquer, but the main "issue" is often that they use more care when doing the vinyl mix than the digital one (except lately on studio masters 24/88, 96 , 192).

[floydpink2222]

however sound Great!!!!!