Statement from Capitol Records on THE BEATLES "The Capitol Albums Vol. 2" set

Hunter likes all whine.

mud-

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression that there are no mono masters for The Early Beatles and Help!. The fold down was created when the engineer was cutting the record.

 

Thanks again for the info, Wollensack. However, as some other forum members have asked, do you know if Capitol is aware that the mono versions of The Early Beatles and Help were also "stereo to mono stepdowns" and are not from the correct, original 1965 fold down mono masters?

Will The Early Beatles and Help also be fixed?

 

I'm gettin' a cluster headache.

mud-

 

Really? No mono cutting master or even a mono tape made concurrent with the mastering?

 

Join the club.

 

Be proud.

 

Could be - anyone know?

I would be interested to know whether the original 1960s Capitol "fold-downs" are really all straight 50-50 channel combinations of whether any level-riding was ever performed and/or separate channel processing ever applied during bounce-down.....

 

There were 40 pages of whining in the previous installment of this thread.

 

True but how you can thread crap so well amongst all this whining amazes me.

Help yourself!

mud-

 

Although this is great news, it does leave me a bit worried for the future. Since the mistake was made by Sterling Sound, I'm wondering if this means that Ted Jensen might be blackballed by Capitol from working on a potential Volume 3, and we might end up getting stuck with a Bob Norberg (or worse) mastered set.

James

 

Thank you Wollensack!

 

How am I thread crapping? My posts are on-topic. I was unaware that this was the "Capitol Records can do no wrong" thread. Steve Hoffman himself seems to agree with me that the Capitol Albums concept was pointless from the get-go, and has made several posts to that effect throughout these threads (sorry, I've never played the Steve card before, but I just had to this time).

 

Bite your tongue!!!

 

I'm glad the problem has been admitted and that fixes will be available in some capacity. But I still think it's lousy for Capitol to allow defective discs to get out at all. They seem to be aware specifically of where the mix up occured in terms of manufacturing facilities, etc. I would still tend to think Capitol could trace which retailers received defective discs. I still just don't like the idea that Capitol is knowingly allowing defective discs to be sold, even if they know about it and they issue a press release, etc. I just don't like the idea that consumers who support Capitol's product should have to buy a product not knowing whether it's defective or not.

Hopefully, the "exchange" program won't be too convoluted or confusing, and hopefully they'll send back replacement discs in a timely fashion. Also, considering that Capitol knowingly is issuing the defective discs, they should not require consumers to send back the defective discs, because buying the set and then doing without some or all of the discs while they are replaced is a hassle that consumers shouldn't have to deal with in light of Capitol knowing the discs were defective when they issued them.

I don't know if this "statement" is an official press release or just an informal comment from a Capitol official, but I think the tone of the statement is lousy as well. It has a really dismissive tone, which is strange considering most of the people who would ask for a replacement are the audiophile type that know that it's certainly not the case that the fold-downs sound the same as original mono mixes. It's funny that Capitol would issue a statement about a controversey started by discussion among audiophiles and then completely insult those audiophiles.

 

Go ahead play it. I'm saying that your posts are anti-this project. Others are complaining about fold-downs and errors. None of your posts (or Steve's ) have been pulled so it's not a big deal.

BTW, you had 35 posts in these Capitol threads, Steve had 1.

mud-

 

As if Capitol cares about audiophiles. If they did, we wouldn't have suffered with the 1987 mastering of the Beatles' catalog since, well, 1987. This set is not aimed at audiophiles - it's aimed at baby boomers who for whatever reason are nostalgic about Beatles VI. The only reason that the mono mixes are on these sets is because even Capitol would be too embarassed to charge $60 for a set of four 23-minute long CDs. Adding the mono mixes makes the CDs 46 minutes long, and lets Capitol list 22 songs for each disc instead of the original butchered 11, thereby creating a perception of added "value" to the baby boomer consumer.

And this is my last word on the subject, honest to God. Mud can ban me from the site forever if I post again on this topic.

 

By the way, I'm also wondering if the small box vs. long box packaging will have any relation to what pressing of the disc is used. They would presumably devote a specific lot of discs to each type of packaging since specific box types are going to specific retailers.

I'm still interested in how many sets are defective. I think it might be a large number, maybe all of the "first run" of discs (which would be what appears on the release date predominantly). It must be an amount of discs that Capitol cannot easily recall and reissue new copies for by April 11th.

I'll be getting the small box on April 11th (assuming Target has that box style again) since I am obsessive enought that the box has to match the style I have for Vol. 1. Plus, I think the small box packaging is just preferable in general.

 

We have plenty of reports of the faulty set among the European pressings as well as Wollensack's US pressing. I think they've pressed a $#!+load of bad discs......

 

I think it's their way of heading off a stampede of returns from people who otherwise wouldn't bother. This way they only have to replace the discs for those that notice the problem and care. It's their way of saying that even though some audiophiles noticed an original mono mix problem, the issue wasn't about audio quality, so if you're just listening to the stereo versions, which is what most will do, then you needn't be upset or do anything.

 

Oh, I know Capitol has no particular interest in audiophiles. I just found it interesting that they would make such a blatantly wrong statement (saying more or less that fold-downs are no different than the real mono mixes) in light of the fact that it was audiophiles who began the probe into the problem. Has this Capitol "statement" been issues officially to the press or any other websites? If this was a statement offered to a member of this board for board members to keep up to date on the problem, then it's even more puzzling that the statement would be so dismissive of the sonic differences prevalent in a fold-down mix.

 

I think that's a fair way of looking at it. The only qualm I have with the press release is that they could have identified exactly which discs are affected. Right now only those that notice the problem will know what to send back.

 

Capitol had nothing to do with the debacle of the original Beatles CD catalog. Thank Mike Jarratt, George Martin and everyone at Abbey Road in England who worked on the project.

 

No, they're upset because the set used fold-downs instead of *real* mono mixes on Rubber Soul. I'm not a big fan of the Capitol albums project either, but that to me is worth complaining about as for now, these sets are a chance to get the mono mixes of some of the Rubber Soul songs on CD.

 

Interesting thought, and quite possible. At the same time, I would think that if Capitol wanted to head off a stampede of returns from consumers who may not even hear the differences but simply have heard about a defect and therefore assume they should get a replacement, then the easiest way to avoid that for Capitol would be to not even admit the problem exists.

The majority of fans apart from dedicated fans and audiophiles may not have even heard about the fold-down problem. Heck, there still will probably be tons of people who buy the defective set and will never know or care.

It seems strange for Capitol to announce the problem and draw attention to it, but then marginalize the problem and the people who might hear the defect. Maybe it's a legal obligation to avoid deceiving consumers without addressing the problem.