The new re-master sounded remarkably "quiet" and I could hear almost no surface noise at the volume which I use but between two of the tracks I could hear some crackling but this did not affect the music.
The 2014 version and the 1963 version sounded remarkably similar, to my ears anyway, for frequency response etc. The 1963 version sounded distinctly louder, perhaps it was mastered louder to cover up for the deficiencies of early sixties record players which suffered from amplifier hum, mains hum, rumble and wow and flutter. All of these problems have largely been eliminated by modern kit.
The AM radios of the day also suffered from fading and sometimes a soft recording would fade away completely to become almost inaudible. This problem still exists if you tune in to a distant AM radio station.
The older record also showed some signs of (pleasant) harmonic distortion because it had been played so often. Had the 1963 record not been played at all it would probably have sounded exactly the same as 2014 version, apart from the difference in volume.
Remember that repeated playing of the newly re-mastered version will still wear out the groove - even though newer MM cartridges use tracking weights which are a lot lighter than the ceramic cartridges that we used in the sixties.
Both records had been very well pressed and were made from "virgin" vinyl but the 1963 record is 160 gms as opposed to 180 gms in weight; not that that makes much difference.
Many of the reviews of the new re-master, on forums and in magazines, have gone overboard with hyperbole and superlatives. Of course the record has been mastered and pressed perfectly; but it only sounded substantially better than the original would have done, in the sixties, because I was playing it on better equipment.
When I first played a new Beatles record, in 1963, it sounded almost as good as today but from then on it was downhill as the equipment damaged the record or your friends returned it scratched after borrowing it. The record also had to survive many parties.
What you are now getting is a record which has been perfectly mastered and produced and the packaging is almost a replica of the original. The inner sleeve does not have an advert for "Emitex" printed on it but the outer sleeve is almost exactly the same.
To obtain an original record with the same playback quality will cost you a lot of money even if anyone is prepared to sell it to you. I doubt that a mint copy of the newly re-mastered version will command a similar price to the original in 50 years time.
http://www.cnet.com/news/youve-never-heard-the-beatles-sound-like-this-before/
The sound of the 2014 LP will not take you back to the sixties because you have to play it on modern equipment to avoid damaging it.
It is almost impossible to do a like for like comparison and most commentators fail to recognise this hence all the superlatives and hyperbole. If you replay the mono record through one speaker you will get some idea of what it was like to hear music from a single source but the mains hum, rumble and wow and flutter will be missing. You can just as easily hear scratches and crackle now as you could have done in the sixties if you do not take considerable care of your LP.
If you are a fan of The Beatles and can only bear to play analogue sourced music then I recommend this new re-mastered LP of "With The Beatles"; but please be aware that you will not be taken back to sixties "sonic heaven".
I love the Beatles but I don't have the money to spend on such an indulgence. I have all of the CDs from about 20 years ago (and of course they will, no doubt, have been 're-mastered' several times since) and I did once take a deep breath and buy the Anthology set - which was great. But in a way, the Beatles are no longer as essential to me as they used to be. I do most listening via Spotify Premium, and because the Beatles industry is too sensible to put them on there, I have weaned myself off them.
ReplyDelete