Just found this 2nd part over the weekend, thanks for expanding what you’ve previously offered.

I’ve pre-ordered the Mono set from Amazon and may potentially buy the individual stereo Abbey Road and Let It Be, depending on how the new remasters stand up against the ’87 versions of those same records.

The Stereo/Mono debate was something I didn’t even know existed until the mid 90s but unfortunately I see the embers glowing on this for years to come. The bottom line for me is I can appreciate both and it really depends on whether I’m listening to the music through loudspeakers or headphones as to which I prefer.

I don’t tend to care for hard-panning through headphones so, to my own admission, I avoid this whenever possible. It doesn’t bother me to hear those same songs through loudspeakers, however, because it provides for a more separated soundstage and doesn’t overwhelm my ears. In fact, sometimes this difference alone is enough to make certain songs in stereo my first choice. I like that its not so cut and dry that all songs must be listened through one medium or another.

I appreciate nostalgia and the feeling I get when listening to versions that resemble the records my Dad raised me on in the 70s, but I try to focus more on what actually sounds better. In other words, I don’t dismiss Anthology, Love, or Let It Be… Naked simply because they aren’t part of the official canon. Love is pure audible bliss in and of itself, and it leaves me anticipating what more can be done (in due time) with earlier works.

If those of you that may be on the fence have never heard the White Album in true mono, some might say its worth the price of admission alone. The cost-conscious side of me might disagree but I will say the mix is truly spectacular and (in my opinion) brings new life to this collection. Add that to the fact that Mono Masters will be available as well, decision made: Mono set

This is more applicable for those like me who cannot afford both sets. Besides, the stereo remasters are available individually and can be purchased over time (easier on budget) if they prove to be significantly better than the ’87 versions.

if i were you, i’ll try not to be overconfident about the loudness war. Quote from this article ( http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2009/apr/08/beatles-back-catalogue-remastered-reissued ) : “On the bright side, Howlett remarked, “they sound louder than previous CD reissues.” Well worth the wait.”

Anyway, the two posts are very instructive, thanks !

Normally, you’d be right: convert the stereo songs to mono and save money by not buying the mono boxed set. The problem is that back in the 1960s, the mono mixes were different – sometimes very different – than the stereo mixes. For example, the mono mixes of “Baby You’re a Rich Man” and “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds” feature different electronic effects than the stereo versions. The mono mix of “I’m Only Sleeping” features backwards electric guitar in different places than the stereo version. The mono mix of “Yellow Submarine” features an acoustic guitar strum on the very first note of the song, which isn’t present in the stereo mix. The mono mix of “If I Fell” features a single-tracked vocal by John Lennon, but the stereo version is double-tracked.

Not only that, but the volume of the instruments and vocals was balanced differently in the mono and stereo mixes.

Of course, I realize that most people would read this and say, “Yeah, so what?” The relatively minor variations between the mono and stereo mixes aren’t worth $228 to most people, but I’m a die-hard Beatles musicologist and enjoy studying every recording closely. Besides, I don’t hang out at bars and buy alcohol, I don’t go to casinos and gamble, I don’t own an HDTV, I don’t buy new shoes every three months, and I don’t buy cigarettes. Instead, I buy Beatles boxed sets.

Sandy, you’re right, $428 (give or take) spread out over a lifetime ends up being a ton of enjoyment for very little money. In fact, if I average out the amount of money my family and I have spent on Beatles CDs from 1987 until the end of 2009, it equals roughly $4 a month, every month, for the last 22 years. That’s not so bad.

And Nick, I agree that listening to the stereo mixes in headphones is more interesting and stimulating than listening to the mono mixes, but I think once I get the boxed sets, I’ll listen to both versions equally until I figure out which version of each song I prefer.

I have the original Sgt. Pepper mono mix on vinyl, and I can see where certain aspects of the mix become noticeable in comparison to the stereo mix (comparing 1967 mono to 1987 stereo here). I personally cannot make up my mind about which mix is more beneficiary. When listening to the albums on a nice set of speakers, it really doesn’t matter if the mix is in stereo or mono as long as the bass and treble balance and it sounds good at any volume. Listening with headphones is something different for me; I find mono to be dull this way. It’s boring to have all signals concentrated to both sides at the same time, and it’s too distracting for me. I usually listen to music with headphones, so it’s pretty safe to say that my choice here would be the stereo mix set. I feel that the mono mix I have of Sgt. Pepper sounds better than its CD counterpart, but only because of analog’s superiority, and it is still not the case for headphones. I understand that the mono mixes may have better balance and even have some nuances that the stereo mixes may not (and vice versa; listen to the Good Morning Good Morning/Sgt. Pepper Reprise intro embedded above to hear what I mean), but I’d rather go with what sounds better both ways.

As for the above suggestion, make what you will of it and try it; I’ve folded down mixes just for fun before and they sounded fine to me. =)