Best Sounding digital Beatles singles comp?

I didn't think of it, actually. I was all involved with trying to do the EQ fix on I'll Get You. We should try it to see what we come up with.

 

I didn't know Mr. Jarrett passed away RIP. More from Record Collector June 1987....

RC: Sgt. Pepper is about to be released on CD. How does it stand up?

MJ: Pepper sounds great on CD. The stereo was used very creatively, almost as if it was part of the 'story'

RC: The question we have to ask about the man who's prepared the Beatles CD's: are you yourself a Beatles fan?

MJ: I wasn't a Beatles fanatic, I must confess, though since I have been doing the CD work I have begun to appreciate them a great deal more. It's great just being able to listen to the master tapes...."

KInda chilling isn't it? He thinks the Pepper CD sounds great, has just begun to appreciate them more....and its great hearing them on the master tapes. Please EMI/Apple let a true fan and great engineer.....(Mr. Hoffman take a bow) work his magic on their catalogue. Cheers, Ron

 

I didn't know Jarrett had passed away either. The above interview may explain why he didn't realize that his CD's sounded like crap - perhaps he never listened to the vinyl much (if at all) if he wasn't a "Beatles fanatic"!

Derek

 

But isn't this one of the big problems about the whole beatle catalogue. "He never listened to the vinyl" suggest he should have been aiming for what the vinyl sounded like. Yet I think in '87 this was very much NOT what a lot of people mastering for CD were doing. They were preparing sound for a new format and new systems that were playing that format. Clearly lots of people did what Steve espouses which is they made flat transfers onto the new format..ie they were listening and made judgements dependent on that. At EMI there seems to have been mass seduction and confusion by the new digital formats because they mucked around with the beatles stuff so much. Who knows what was going on?
But I've always wondered, would Steve go for mastering of the fabs catalogue (if it was in his control) to put onto disc WHAT THE RECORDS SOUNDED LIKE or would he put onto disc WHAT THE MASTERS SOUNDED LIKE? Because in some cases they are clearly very different things.
William

 

I covered a lot of this in the article I wrote on the current state of The Beatles CD catalogue for Beatlology magazine a year and a half ago.

I stand by what was written in the Beatlology article. My research pointed to Sgt. Pepper's LHCB being mastered to CD from a safety copy. Steve has mentioned this on several occasions. Also, EMI was under pressure to get the CD released in time for the 20th anniversary of SPLHCB. They could not find the master tape. I highly doubt that Mike Jarrett or EMI would want to be telling Record Collector that bit of information.

"Oh, and by the way, we couldn't find the master tape for Sgt. Pepper's, so we used a saftey copy. Not the best sound, but it's as good as it's going to get under the circumstance." I somehow don't think so.

You left out an important and troubling part of Mike Jarrett's answer to this question.

Q: ‘When you were mastering the CDs did you play with the sound of the original tape to add equalisation or compression?’

Mike Jarrett: 'Again, I referred to the original documentation to see what was done in the sixties, I’ve had a couple of years experience as a cutting engineer...I did even experiments with running the master tapes through the machines that were actually in use at the time; but I found that the best sound came from using modern machines with 2-track heads.’
______________________

Also about the mono vs stereo CDs, here is the full Feb. 1987 interview with George Martin by Allan Kozinn of the New York Times.

Why release the first four albums on CD in mono?
Well, why not ...

 

Hi Miike,
Actually I used that exact quote earlier in this thread....some of our fellow forum members were quite upset reading it too. Ron

 

Thanks Ron. I missed your paraphrase in post #107. Still very sad that a 2-track tape machine was used for the mono tape transfers instead of a full-track machine.

You should try and dig up a copy of the Nov./Dec. 2003 issue of Beatlology magazine with my "Save The Beatles" cover article. The issue also contains mikey5967's inteview w/ Steve about The Beatles and Todd Fredericks' article on the Beatles CD EP and CD singles box sets. IIRC, there is also an article written by David Schwartz. Mikey called it the "All Hoffman" issue. Some very good reading there.

 

Let me clarify my earlier comment. What I meant by the "He never listened to the vinyl" comment was that if he had, he'd realize that his CD's sounded like crap. I didn't mean to imply that he should make CD's sound just like the vinyl - just that they shouldn't sound worse!

Derek

 

Miike, can you give us any idea of your source of the story about the Safety Copy of SPLHCB being used for the CD? (without naming names)

Derek

 

I'm glad you said that, because I've been trying to find a good way to phrase exactly the same thing. I think part of the problem was that there was a movement afoot at the time to try to improve the noisy vinyl sound and to present a cleaner more modern sound sort of the newer is always better argument. Both in Jarrett's and George Martin's comments there is a common thread of we are improving the sound rather than just putting the Beatles out on CD going on.

 

Hi Miike,
I just went through all my back issues of Beatlology and I don't have that issue, or the one preceeding it...I think I was moving then and never made it to my local Tower to get it. Are back-issues still available? I'd love to read the "all Hoffman" issue I like getting information directly from the source, I worked in the business for many years and know the importance of "going to the source" As an aside, I went through the whole Morris Levy stuff...now THAT was frightening!!! If you've ever seen The Sopranos you know what I mean.

I agree with Derek...is there a way you can confirm a safety master was used to master the Pepper CD? While I agree that Mike Jarrett or George Martin would never admit such a claim....it seems very strange that the master for this LP could not be located in 1987. Surely, Martin had the 4-track master at his disposal on his Making of Sgt. Pepper special...Is this so-called safety master...a 4-track copy...or a copy of the stereo master as prepared for LP? Any confirmed information or documentation would be most welcomed. And yes, I know you can't say "John Dow" showed me the detailed notes on what master was used...but perhaps there is a way to satisfy us? Mobile Fidelity has very detailed notes on what masters were used to master their MOFI set. They claim they had the master tapes for Pepper. Was this true? It just seems beyond reason that every other master was in the archives....HELP!!!!
Thanks again, Ron

 

Ron, the safety is a copy of the stereo master.

 

Hi Steve,
It's the worrying about world peace and hunger and the economy that makes this forum such a wonderful release for us all. Sorry if we sound so consumed by the minutia.

 

Out of Phase Mono

Hi,

Can anyone explain to me the difference between "picking" the best channel in mono or averaging both channels into a new one, as far as trying to fix an out of phase problem.

Wouldn't both procedures do the same thing?

Thanks!

 

Awright... Time to get this thread back on track. We're talking about the Beatles singles, right? And the best digital versions to use for your comp.

Well, we've recently revisited She Loves You/I'll Get You and Love Me Do/P.S. I Love You. (Visit the SLY/IGY thread for the background.) To recap: SLY/IGY is the only single that's in true mono on the CD singles box. Therefore, we assumed there was no need, or at least no way, to fix any phase problems on those two sides. Steve recommended the EP box as the best source for SLY. IGY, however, does not appear on the EP box. Forum member another side suggested Past Masters (L channel) as the best source for IGY.

I've listened to all digital sources for SLY/IGY: the CD singles box, EP box (SLY only), Past Masters, and Dr. Ebbetts' needle drop. IMO, the winner is Past Masters, L channel only, for both tracks. The CD singles box versions sound terrible. The EP box version of SLY is correctly mastered, but the later-gen tape source betrays itself as a diminution of clarity and dynamics. The needle drops also show the limitations of using a later-gen source (i.e., the 45s), as well as whatever distortion is on the vinyl.

The Past Masters versions fail the OOPS test, meaning that the mono master was played back over a stereo tape head and transferred to CD without being folded back to mono. The L channel is the better pick for both tracks, being more full-range and less distorted than the R channel. This is not to say that the PM versions sound great, even when "corrected" back to mono. The digital transfer is mediocre at best. However, I think it's the best option we have, i.e., the only digital transfer of the master tape that is not irrevocably fouled up (a la the CD singles box).

As for LMD/PSILY, my initial recommendation was 1 for LMD, and Dr. Ebbetts' needle drop for PSILY. The album versions of both these sides are markedly inferior to the single versions, being "crappy dubs" of the singles (Steve's words) with added compression. From previous threads, I had assumed that these inferior album versions were also used on the EP box. However, Steve says that the single versions were used.

I listened to all sources for LMD/PSILY, and found it a close call. The versions on the EP box do sound like the single versions, as represented by Dr. Ebbetts' needle drop (PSILY) and the 1 CD (LMD). However, the same comments apply as regards the later-gen sources for the EP box. The version of LMD on 1 is clearly from a better tape (i.e., the original mono master), although it does sound a little funny -- sort of "shrink-wrapped" and airless, perhaps because of NR. The needle drop of PSILY is actually a tad clearer and more dynamic than the EP box version, but they're quite close. So my recommendations for these remain the same, with the EP box versions of both tracks as a very close second.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by averaging. But if you mean that you would take both channels and create a mono track by "folding" one into the other, then I can answer your question.

The problem with any track that has phase issues is that the two tracks are slightly different. That difference is usually the result of playing a mono tape through a stereo machine and the heads of the stereo machine not being properly aligned. Sometimes, but not always, the track's channels are out of synch in such a way that it is called out of phase. The characterictics of that out of phase track are only apparent though when the track is folded down to mono. At that point the track exhibits the tell tale signs of being out of phase: it has a swishy sound (which is caused by the tape turning) and the loss of the top end of the track. If, however, you pick one of the two resulting channels and use that as your mono track, you not only avoid any out of phase pitfalls, but you also theoretically improve the sound, because you are using a truly mono track.

Welcome and I hope that answers your question.

 

Based on my previous post (#142), here is my revised track list for volume 1 of the "best digital Beatles singles" comp:

1. Love Me Do (Andy White on drums version) - Beatles 1. 2ND CHOICE: EP box.
[1a. ALTERNATE. Love Me Do (Ringo on drums version) - needle drop.]
2. P.S. I Love You - needle drop. 2ND CHOICE: EP box.
3. Please Please Me - needle drop.
4. Ask Me Why - needle drop.
5. From Me To You - L
6. Thank You Girl - L
7. She Loves You - Past Masters (L)
8. I'll Get You - Past Masters (L)
9. I Want to Hold Your Hand - R
10. This Boy - R
11. Can't Buy Me Love - R
12. You Can't Do That - R
13. A Hard Day's Night - L
14. Things We Said Today - L
15. I Feel Fine - L
16. She's A Woman - L
17. Ticket To Ride - R
18. Yes It Is - R
19. Help! - L
20. I'm Down - R
21. We Can Work It Out - L
22. Day Tripper - R
23. Paperback Writer - R
24. Rain - R
25. Yellow Submarine - R
26. Eleanor Rigby - L

As I've mentioned before, if you use this running order, Gracenote will recognize your comp, filling in the track names for you.

 

Thanks! Looking forward to Disc Two!

 

A.s. is right, of course. Averaging both channels (i.e., combining them into a new mono track) just makes the problem worse. If you do that, you encode the reinforcements and cancellations caused by the OOP problem into the new channel. So you have a new, bad-sounding mono track that can't be fixed.

If instead you just eliminate one of the OOP channels, you restore the track back to mono. The reason for picking one channel over the other is that, as a.s. and I have found, one channel usually is better than the other.

 

Well, that's true of course. We are only helping it a bit, Steve, but they do sound quite a bit better at least to my ears. The main thing I notice is a decrease in distortion and a reduction some of the muffled sound of the CD singles. What we're doing is half the process I understand the next step would be to fix the tonality. And I WOULD like to be able to make EQ changes to the tracks, but I'm afraid I just wouldn't know where to begin with that.

 

I found the needle drop of PSILY to be the best version. It does suffer from a bit of brightness, but after living with it for a week or so, I think it fits in well with the rest of the tracks.

 

Hi Steve...
It IS fun, not much different than using our old graphic Eq's and making nice "smilie face" curve tapes for our spiffy $100 car cassette decks back in the late 70's . Now if we had the master tree from the EMI forest...well then, that would sure be a whole lotta fun. Cheers, Ron