Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

I have also been waiting for re-releases of the US album releases, admittedly because that's what I grew up on. Also, I don't really consider "Past Masters" (or anything released after "Let It Be" for that matter) to be a "Beatles Album", I consider them as just complations of previously released stuff by the record company and not by the Beatles themselves. I'm sure many folks will disagree and have good reason to do so.

The thing I love about the old stereo albums is that the vocals are on one side and the instruments are on the other. This makes it great for learning the tunes, because you pan to one side to learn the instrument parts, and the other for the vocal parts.

John: I certainly agree that the Past Masters is a compilation effort and as such, while valuable, does not capture the feeling associated with a particular album.

Based on the initial exposure to Beatles' songs, certain songs just seem to go together. How many Beatles' enthusiasts start singing the next song as it appeared on a particular album even before the track playing had ended?

I do that quite often, especially with "Meet The Beatles" The are permantly connected to each other in my brain. Many songs from
many different albums are like that with me as I'm sure they are with many others here.
I for one would love to have the original mono mixes of these albums on CD.
They have had two and three track recorders for long before they had stereo LP's, they just didn't have the technolgy available to be able to make a stereo record until late in '57. The first true stereo records were the jazz albums and they were little more than stringing up a couple of mics and having the band play live. All the Bluenote recordings until 1968 for example were direct to two track with no mixing done, so what you heard was what they played, that is one thing I love about the old jazz recordings. No punches there, haha! They sounded unbelievable though, you could actually hear the room ambience in many of them especially in Monks late 50's stuff.
The reason I bring this up is that I don't think they had stereo boards early on where you could pan instruments and vocals from left to right etc. If they did, they certainly weren't used by the Beatles engineers. They just took the mono tracks and put some in one side and put the others in the other side, it did make for easy learning though. But I had a mono player and never spent the extra buck you had to pay for them anyway so it didn't help me. I didn't even hear many recordings by the Beatles in stereo until the CD's came out. I played my old mono LP's and actually stiff prefer that sound because it is the way they were meant to sound, I only say that because of the way they were recorded.

Yes, I think some of the mono albums sound better. Another money making idea! Re issue everything in mono!

How 'bout a reissue of all the albums in stereo that doesn't sound like ****....If "Dr. Ebbets" can do it, I find it hard to believe those working with the master tapes can not. Imagine? And PLEASSSSEEEEE....keep those American travesties confined to a sad Capitol money making venture of the 60's and 70's....

They can not make a true stereo recording out of mono tapes, it would be artificial stereo. They are what they are. Just for example they probably put all the basic tracks on just one track on the early albums with their two and three track machines, what can you do with something like that unless you digitalize it and make virtual stereo? I don't think anyone here would want that.
Sgt. Pepper was recorded on a 4 track machine.
And finally: One man's travesty is another man's treasure.

I remember A/B'ing the CD of 'Please Please Me' with 'Meet the Beatles', and being so disapointed back in 1987 that the record sounded better! It had more bass, more definition, and I am sorry but even the weird stereo mixes that the engineers put out, at least on the early releases, sound better to my ears than the mono versions.

EMI should remaster the whole catalog, and put it out on SACD. Then reissue the original british versions in stereo and mono, on each cd. While doing this they could clean up the american versions, and release them as album replicas.

If you like the American versions, you could have those, if you like the British, you could have those.

Why EMI doesn't do this is unbelievable to me, because a lot of Beatles fans, would buy both and not complain if they were priced right.

It would be nice to have, and it makes good business sense.

EMI/Apple should do something because frankly the released CD's are pretty awlful looking, and sounding. Only the 'white album' anniversary release (the album replica version) looked like more than 2 seconds were put into it.

Remastering is defenitly needed.
I can't help telling everyone how horrible original releases sound comparing to Dr. Ebbetts and MirrorSpock titles.
I only have a few like With The Beatles, A Hard Day's Night, Sgt Pepper's in mono, Abbey Road and Hey Jude.
These are much superior in quality then the CD's.

Although I'm fairly young compared to most people here, I'm turning 18 next month so yeah, this probably makes me one of the youngest RIC owner here... Anyways, The Beatles have been my favorite band for quite awhile, and I've enjoyed the US releases, and the Canadian ones too (Long Tall Sally and Twist And Shout).
I'm also very familiar with HELP! with all the orchestral pieces in between, it's one of the albums of my youth. They have their pros and cons and if it reminds you of your youth I wouldn't see the problem in owning these on CD...

I Love the Beatles More Than Life itself & Must agree although I respect the fact that the Beatles never aproved of the American album releases I think it would be interesting if EMI would give us silly Americans the Choice of what version we would buy But honestly I would buy both & I agree with John Ashfield that the packaging is terrible outside of the White album & then the Yellow Submarine re-issue, all the other cd's look like ****. but I do Like the Let it be ...Naked cd better than the original it just sounds edgyer & believe it or not Cleaner.
Not To Change gears BUT Elvis Costello has re-reissued his albums on Columbia- warner bros- Rykodisc & Rhino And Yes I own them all, maybe they should eliminate the 2 past masters CD's & put The corelating Singles with the respective album, for instance put Paperback writer & Rain at the end of the revolver disc because most Beatles Fans know they come from the same sessions & a hard look at the back cover of the vynal version of revolver that Black & white photo of the Fabs in Shades is from The promo vidoe shoot the Fabs did for the songs Rain & Paperback Writer to be seen on the Ed Sulivan show in 1966, Then they made a second set of promo films in the Park for the same two songs, (After Mccartney had gis motor bike crash that chipped his tooth I scared his upper lip ) (These films coupled with the yesterday & Today covers started the Pauld is Dead & replaced by a look alike rumors) Thanks for letting me share my veiws Peace. I own a 1989 Ric V360

"I do Like the Let it be ...Naked cd better than the original it just sounds edgyer & believe it or not Cleaner."

I'm pretty much 100% sure that Let It Be Naked was distributed in 24-bit. That would be the key to the great sound you here...
Imagine listening to A Hard Day's Night in 24-bit and hearing that great chord which starts the album...

Oh... And welcome to the forums, although I'm fairly new here...

I like mine with scratches, haha!

I'm not convinced that releasing the American Lp's in CD form is a good thing. Let's face it, one way or another the songs are already released. Either through the British albums or the countless compilation albums with one exception. I would love to hear "Live at the Hollywood Bowl" on CD. But other than that... Honestly how many different ways can you release the same songs? I think that their is enough in the vaults that would make a truly enjoyable album. I'm sure for the right price Yoko could cough up a couple of John songs. I enjoy the American albums, but I have the albums. Do we need them in CD form? I'm with Bob. I prefer the old American albums, scratches and all.

I just bought an original "The Beatles Second Album" in stereo with all kinds of reverb in it, but I love it, it's in great shape and sounds like The Beatles are supposed to sound to me anyway, kills the CD's in sound quality, nice and warm. It has the old Capitol label and the songs are even in the correct order, haha!

Is that 2nd album on cd a legit release?

I have the I Feel Fine/ She's A Woman American issue 45 (among others), and prefer that, with it's dripping in reverb sound, to the drier British versions.