Beatles Red & Blue Albums Remastered Oct. 19 (Part Two)

I think that should be the forum's motto in general.

 

I own the 1993 CDs, as well as not-exactly-VG-condition 1973 Apple Records LPs (I also once owned the Red and Blue albums on 8-track). Nevertheless, I bought the new CDs from Amazon and have been listening to them all day, especially the Blue album.

 

I saw the new booklet for the Red album. At least two of the pictures are reversed. The last one, and the most noticeable one with the crate where the letters are backwards. Any photo program could have simply reversed these to look correct. How can nobody catch these things when nobodies like me can see it on first glance?

 

Do you like them better than the 1993 CDs?

Evan

 

That is FUNNY!

 

WOW....I laughed out loud at this picture. Very well done!

 

On a more absurd note...

(...or a bit like Escher...

 

The more I read this thread, the weaker I'm getting.

 

Great!!!!!

 

I just saw your posts about the £7.99 price - I was fearing they'd be cheap, that's why I've been trying to avoid the temptation to go to Sainsburys all week!

What are the booklets like?!!

 

We know the '93 CDs didn't come from EQ'd cutting masters because they used the remixes from Help and Rubber Soul, had the clean intro to ADITL, etc. I.e., plenty of differences from the original LPs.

The original transfers were, according to EMI, mostly/completely flat, from the master tapes. The '93 CDs had additional EQ and noise reduction, in some cases adding more bass and high end.

So, no.

 

The booklet to the Red Album is back to calling "Please Please Me" a #1 single. The history that was abandoned when "1" came out.

 

Jeez, there is so much misinformation in this thread that I don't know where to start.

 

You sound surprised.

 

You've been doing double duty to straighten everything out. I wish I had that patience.

 

But, if they had issued the remastered red and blue CDs first, that would have reduced the demand for the proper albums.

 

Exactly! I compared the early 90s R&B CDs against the new ones.

 

Pre-ordered the Red (19.88) and Blue (13.99) from Amazon with price match guarantee.

Both were delivered Tuesday afternoon. Amazon then refunded 5.89 on the Red album due to the price match guarantee. So 27.98 total for both sets delivered on 10/19 with no chasing around. I can live with that.

 

And, in some cases, possibly slashing the low end because, remember, back then, many people could not handle such deep bass, and would have thrown fits if they encountered distortion because their cheap Sony square aluminum driver home speakers, or their cheap Soundesign system couldn't deliver. I am not saying that's what they did, but from my A/B comparison, that's what I hear, the bass slashed on the older CD. If you take the remastered CD, feed it into your Pro-Tools, and slach the bass up to, say, 25-30Hz, you will hear the effect I hear on the old CD. The remaster's bass sounds full and rich, not boosted.

 

Different country.

 

What on earth are you talking about? Now you're trying to claim the low end was "slashed" on the '87/'88 and '93 CDs because...why, exactly?

As I've asked you before, Grant, without having heard the master tapes, how can you know if CDs have the bass "slashed" or "restored"?

 

I think you need to look closely at the photo with the crate. I believe that one is correct. John is just sitting on top of the upside down crate. Of course when you turn something upside down with lettering on it, it's going to be reversed (and upside down.) Nothing wrong with the photo.

As for the other one you are talking about, I wouldn't know since there is really nothing to orient, except for the building, and I have never seen the photo before. Of course anyone familiar with the building they are posing in front of would be able to comment on it. Paul is left handed and he does appear funny looking in the picture. But I did a scan of that photo myself and then flipped the horizontal and it still looks funny looking. So, I don't know about that one.

 

No, different chart.

 

Well, Luke, neither you or I know the exact truth as to why there is more bass on the new CDs and less on the older one, and which one is "more accurate". And, from the looks of things, the Abbey Road team is content to let us all bicker for eternity about these small issues.

I hear what I hear, and maybe you don't. If you do, we still have disagreements on why. Like I said earlier, I really no longer care why one sounds different than the other, just that they do, and I like the full bass.

So, it's "agree to disagree" time. I will continue to read your arguments.