First Impression: Beatles CD's 1986/87/88

For those old enough to remember.

I know how most everyone feels about them now. But, when the Beatles catalog was first issued in the 1980's what was your initial impression of them at first sight and listen?

 

My first Beatles on CD experience was "Rubber Soul". As soon as I noticed the reverb on John and Pauls vocals, I thought "what on earth is this?? This isn't the album I wanted to buy!" I'd borrowed a pretty scratched LP from an auntie of mine, and was hooked. The CD is a bad remix - which I wasn't aware of until getting it home.

 

I was just 17 (you know what I mean?) when those CD's came out so I thought they were ok. I did notice mixing differences on Help! and Rubber Soul, and I wasn't real thrilled that A Hard Day's Night and Beatles For Sale were mono.

I remember thinking that Magical Mystery Tour sounded odd to me but I can't remember why I thought that. I liked the full stereo on "Penny Lane", "Baby You're A Rich Man" and "All You Need Is Love".

Everything else from Pepper on sounded much better than the scratchy LP's I had at the time. Past Masters 1 & 2 sounded like a mixed bag, IIRC.

 

Of course, nowadays The Beatles invariably top any list of whose catalog is in worst need of remastering. At the time, however, this catalog rollout seemed more intelligently thought out, and more concerned with the artists' intent, than almost anything else in the music stores. George Martin was involved, the first four albums were issued in mono against the wishes of the label, and as the UK configurations were made universal. This was a pretty big deal in '86.

For me, the CDs were a revelation, at least up to SPLCB. For most U.S. listeners, this was our first exposure to the original UK sequencings, not to mention mono, and I was impressed how much better these CDs played than the U.S. "butchered" vinyl configurations I was familiar with. I started to listen to and appreciate the pre-PEPPER albums intently for the first time. I don't remember hearing complaints about the sound quality for some time, and even then it was more about the nuances of mixes rather than poor remastering.

To a certain extent, I think in '86 most listeners were still too thrilled by the obvious, immediate improvements wrought by CD technology -- the absence of surface noise, the increase in dynamics, constant speed, the ability to play an album through both sides, immediate track access, etc. -- to hear the sort of problems we complain about on this forum. I mean, the average home turntable was a SoundDesign rack system with a cassette player built in, its original snap-on sapphire cartridge still in use after 1000 hours, probably with a nickel taped to it. For these listeners, a Beatles CD played on a $300 Sony 16-bit 4X-oversampling CD player was a quantum improvement over their battered HEY JUDE LP.

 

Lucky for me back then Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band was the first one on CD that I heard. My first impression was that I *needed* to buy additional titles.

 

I remember the hype in 1987, the way they sprinkled them out so by June, Sgt. Pepper came out for its 20th anniversary: ("it was twenty years ago today..."). For that CD the booklet was full and loaded with extras (outtakes from the photo session, good liner notes, etc.) and yet the rest of the catalog was "No-frills" Look at how they chopped up the back photo of the Revolver LP and put it in the Cd booklet. Or look at how cropped and blocked off the back picture of the Magical Mystery Tour or Abbey Road Lp jackets are for the CD. And speaking of MMT, why no lyric and photo booklet for CD? Sure we did get that for the EP CD collection, but what a wasted opportunity.

Considering how important the Beatles are in music and comparing it to their catalog and how it sounds (Beatles for Sale included)...my reaction now is


Brian

 

I bought the Japan ABBEY ROAD CD back in '84....and for a while, it was downhill after that: either mono which could have been better, or remixes that were(IMO)unnecessary....things would get better here and there, but overall, it's still a disappointing digital catalog, all the more because this is only THE GREATEST ROCK BAND IN WORLD HISTORY....it's a sad state of affairs when some bootlegs & counterfeits offer better sound! That should never happen, but with the Fabs, it did.


Someone tell EMI and Apple Corps it's still not too late.....


ED

 

Ed, The Rolling Stones CD catalog is in very, very good shape. We're talking about that other British band, The Beatles.

 

First impression? I was horrified! and saddened
After owning the entire World Vinyl catalog...

 

I actually enjoy a number of these CDs for casual listening. Those CDs I like best still fall well short of my favorite vinyl copies, but they're plenty listenable. The CDs of Sgt Pepper's and beyond really aren't that bad, IMO.

I'd love nothing more than for EMI to really nail the Beatles catalog once and for all, but I hafta wonder whether or not some of those old CDs are eventually going to be looked upon more fondly in the future, at least those CDs I've mentioned, which are, evidently, pretty much flat transfers.

 

Well, if they'd had the sense to pack it in after EXILE, I might agree with you!


ED

 

After years of conditioning listening to Capitol stereo I found the early CDs to be rather dry and lifeless upon first listen. I didn't know better, I just thought the CDs were supposed sound that way. Now years later after hearing Parlophone LPs (some on vinyl and some on needle-drops), I realize that the CDs were poorly mastered, to put it mildly.

 

Amen To that brother! Just the fact that Joe average didn't have to get up and change sides, didn't have to hear skips and scratches was a BIG win for audio folk. Those who had bought the MFSL Vinyl series knew the UK pressing situation, but that was a small group.

I remember going to get them and being very excited about it- even though I knew they were mono and I wanted Stereo. After all- who wanted old mono with all this new technology ! I got them all on the release days. Yes- I still have my numbered White Album. I only wish I kept my longboxes!!!

Chris

 

I bought the first four as soon as they came out and could hardly wait to get home to play them. Man, was I dissappointed. Back then I didn't know the reason why, but they sounded horrible to me. I even wrote a letter to the president of Capitol Records stating how utterly dissapointed I was and was going to return them with the letter and not even ask for my money back, but I thought better of it. I still have them but I never play them.

 

My first CD was Abbey Road. This is one of the better sounding ones. I still like it. The White Album and Pepper were the next 2 I bought and I thought they were OK. Once I went CD,I never felt the need to A/B the CDs versus the LP, I just assumed the CDs were better. Boy was I wrong. I still think Abbey Road, White Album and Pepper sound good.

I never did like MMT. I found it dry compared to my US LP. My first time listening to Please Please Me through Rubber Soul were on the CD so I used to think they were fine. Hearing Die Beatles as well as my BC13 made me see the error of my ways!

Sean

 

I don't remember when the last time was I played them. If I really want to listen to the older pieces- I have some dubious stereo copies that sound much better. I also won't listen to MMT, as I have a rip of the German stereo LP that is truly nice.

Its really a shame that ya gotta go "out of bounds" to get decent sounding pieces. Again- blame it on all involved in holding up anything new if its quality. Hey- wait a minute- those two aren't mutually exclusive!!!! It could be new and junk!!!

Chris

 

______________________________________________

Ron, it has been well documented over the years, including the recent article I wrote for Beatlology magazine that George Martin was only brought in on the Beatles CD releases as a "consultant" (outside of his digital remixing on Help! and Rubber Soul). Bhaskar Menon, then Chairman of EMI in the U.K. had already decided to release the first four albums in mono only and the rest in stereo only, before he even consulted Martin. Martin was quoted in at least two article in around 1987 on this subject. The EMI Chairman told George Martin it would be more practical for retailers to only have to stock one version of each album. (Odd, since retailers stocked mono and stereo versions of the same LPs for a couple of decades prior to the compact disc and they continue to stock two different CD releases by an artist today who may have a simultaneous regular and limited edition release.)

Martin had only suggested to EMI that they release the first two albums in mono. He wanted A Hard Day's Night and Beatles For Sale to be issued in stereo on CD.
...

I found one of the George Martin quotes. (I'm not a home right now and do not have access to the article I wrote.) This is from a 1987 interview conducted by Allan Kozinn, New York Times.

Martin - "...So I guess, the question of mono issues--Bhaskar Menon spoke to me about this, generally, when I was called in to review the things, and he pointed out that to issue mono and stereo of everything would be a little bit of a problem from a practical point of view--of stock within shops, of manufacture, and obviously, it would give everybody much less of a headache if there was just one version."

Mr. Menon, what a load of crap.
____________________________

Back to the topic. At the time I thought the CDs sounded pretty good, but as time wore on and I became more knowledgeable about CDs vs vinyl, I began to hear how limited the sound was, particularly on the compressed mono discs. Also I do not enjoy the ADD remixes of Help! and Rubber Soul. I only really enjoy the CDs from Pepper to LIB. Overall, I tend to listen to my Beatles vinyl more than the CDs.

 

Think about it though-

Even if there had been stereo released of either 2 or all 4- we would still be here bitching "about the music". After all- it would probably have not even come close to MFSL levels, nor even Parlophone yellow, and it would still be dry.

Chris

 

Steve-
What do you REALLY mean???

Chris

 

My first impression of the first 4 was total dismay and anger, and I let EMI know about it in no uncertain terms. I still have the reply from George Martin justifying his decision to inflict mono. They remain unplayed to this day.

The remainder I was quite pleased with. My player back then was a Cambridge Audio CD1, a massive three box affair, state of the art, but with nowhere near the same resolution of a current day machine, and the discs sounded as good as any others.

My Beatles CDs are all first generation EMI Swindon pressings.

 

In the early eighties, I really thought CD technology was going to be the saviour of sound quality. Then a friend brought over a CD copy of "A Hard Days Night" which we played and A/B'd with my Blue Odeon AHDN on my '77 vintage AR turntable/Shure cart. Now I know it wasn't kosher to A/B a mono CD with a stereo lp, but, our impression of the CD sound quality? In a word, APPALLED. True crap sound on the CD, a hands-down consensus among a group of listeners...

 

Back then I thought they were harsh and thin. Still think so.

 

Is that Revolver?