Do you think the Beatles Remastered CDs will sell?

[Kino]

Well I mean I hope they would of taken the precautions of making good backups.

 

[CP/M User]

Kino wrote:

Well I mean I hope they would of taken the precautions of making good backups.

Sorry if I sounded double-dutch, my original thoughts about this reads confusing because there are many things which can happen to mastertapes. What I was trying to get at is albums like Days of Future Passed sound inferior since it's release on CD because the original mastertape was damaged (due to poor storage I was told). However mastertapes can simply be damaged from wear and tear and because mastertapes was the kind of media people used in the 60s, it too can suffer wear and tear simply from how much use it got! What I was imply in the case of the Beatles, is I hope they were clever enough to preserve backup copies of their proper mastertapes to ensure that later generations could enjoy their music. Of course nowadays it's perhaps easier to transfer a really good original mastercopy onto a digital media and that way it's kept good for all time! Anyway fingers crossed.

 

[Kino]

Oh! My bad man.

 

[Mr. Shadow]

I'd buy both sets if I had the extra cash.

 

[Mr. Shadow]

However mastertapes can simply be damaged from wear and tear and because mastertapes was the kind of media people used in the 60s, it too can suffer wear and tear simply from how much use it got! What I was imply in the case of the Beatles, is I hope they were clever enough to preserve backup copies of their proper mastertapes to ensure that later generations could enjoy their music.

The engineers say the masters are in excellent condition. Very little compression was used on the remastered versions and noise reduction was also sparse. This is as close to being there live as you'll ever get.

 

[Magic]

The mono sets are going like hot cakes. I would suspect this is because Beatles fans already posses the remasters of the stereo versions. But to have a true-to-sound remaster of the original Mono albums is awesome!

I am like Shadow, I would like to have both sets just because I am an audiophile. And the first remaster was not the best job (1987). I am curious to see how the stereo remix sounds of the mono recordings.

 

[Mr. Shadow]

# The Beatles hold 18 spots on the 200-position Top Comprehensive Albums chart, which breaks a record previously held by ... Michael Jackson. Jackson had previously posted the most simultaneously charting sets with 12 albums on July 25 and also last week.
# The Beatles also hold nine of the top 10 and 15 of the top 18 spots on the Top Pop Catalog chart. a stronghold broken only by Jackson. The Beatles placed a record-breaking 16 titles on the 50-position tally, beating their own mark of 12 on Dec. 9, 1995.

http://www.examiner.com/x-2082-Beatles-Examiner~y2009m9d18-Beatles-remastered-CD-update--Fab-Four-break-records--their-own-and-Michael-Jacksons?cid=examiner-email

 

[Magic]

That was a great article, Shadow. I am very impressed! It would be natural to think that anything "Beatles" would be such a success, and an excellent remaster was way over due.

 

[CP/M User]

Magic wrote:

The mono sets are going like hot cakes. I would suspect this is because Beatles fans already posses the remasters of the stereo versions. But to have a true-to-sound remaster of the original Mono albums is awesome!

I am like Shadow, I would like to have both sets just because I am an audiophile. And the first remaster was not the best job (1987). I am curious to see how the stereo remix sounds of the mono recordings.

What you mean they haven't included the Mono version of the album with the Stereo version? I have The Beatles - The Capital Albums Vol 1. which include Both (Stereo and Mono). Sometimes it's great to have the mono version of the album because the Stereo is impossible to listen to over the screams, but I'm confused as to why anyone would want a Mono studio album! Perhaps I'm all Pro-Stereo, but that's what every sound system is these days - Stereo. If people want their Mono back they need to get old Mono systems, cause that's the proper way to listen to a Mono album! But having said all that I've listened to some Mono albums on a Stereo system which 5.1 sound channel - which works alright in Pro-Logic mode and if the Recording is Good then the Music comes from the Center front speaker.

I don't know I reckon this whole Beatles thing is a bit of a con, I mean I kinda Imagine there being lots of people out there who spent 30 bucks on those earlier Beatles albums and now they do this to people. To spend 30 bucks on those albums then, you would kinda be mad if you hadn't sold them just before they announce these new albums, cause now their probably only worth 5 bucks!

I'm sorry but I just don't know what the beat is when they say Digitally Remastered. Some people were talking about this on the Radio and they said everything is clearer and everything sounds the way it was intended to sound. But the confusing bit is when they say Digitally Remastered - people make it sound like this is the first time ever that the albums have been Digitally Remastered - when in actual fact when the Beatles first came to CD (circa 1987) those albums were Digitally Remastered too!
I can only guess they're trying to make the Cliff Richard's end of the market happy by telling them that this is how it sound have sounded! Cliff Richard (for those who don't know) being the guy who trashed the Beatles and accused them of being poor musicians and not being able to tune in their instruments properly! I think the guy was totally Jealous because the Beatles were in direct competition and took his fame away during that time!

 

[Mr. Shadow]

http://gizmodo.com/5216258/sorry-stereo-but-beatles-in-mono-rocks-a-lot-more