As an analytical, math-oriented guy, I find Berkeley’s style of staging fascinating. I definitely appreciate the flowing movements in this clip, but what really stands out are the dozens of neon-tubed violins that light up twice during the instrumental break. That, coupled with Mervyn LeRoy’s directing, results in a beautiful scene.

Prepare to be blown away…and remember, this was filmed 78 years ago in 1933 without the aid of computers!

YouTube – Busby Berkeley’s violin sequence
(posted by YouTube user takethetube9010)

To me, this performance is more enjoyable and impressive than today’s music videos and pop star performances. Someday, innovation and beauty will make a comeback, right?

In 2010, I saw Gold Diggers of 1933 at the Loew’s Jersey Theatre in Jersey City. I usually hate musical numbers in movies, but I admit, one of the scenes I enjoyed the most features Ginger Rogers singing “We’re in the Money,” including a verse in Pig Latin! Enjoy:

YouTube – Gold Diggers of 1933 – “We’re in the Money”
(posted by YouTube user chackwor)

I know who Lady Gaga is, but have been completely uninterested in her music…until now! It turns out The Beatles wrote her 2009 hit song “Telephone” and performed it during their rooftop concert on January 30, 1969:

YouTube – The Beatles – Telephone

Even after 32 years, I’m still learning new things about The Beatles! And if all of Lady Gaga’s music sounded like this, I’d actually listen to it.

My first Hatfield concert was in mid 2004 at the Bowery Ballroom in NYC. Since then, I’ve seen her perform live six more times throughout NYC and NJ, both solo and with a full band. Here are my online photo albums:

Flickr – Juliana Hatfield live at Maxwell’s in Hoboken, NJ, August 11, 2005

Flickr – Juliana Hatfield live at the Knitting Factory in NYC, October 7, 2005

Flickr – Juliana Hatfield live at Roseland Ballroom in NYC, December 9, 2005

Flickr – Juliana Hatfield live at Bowery Ballroom in NYC, September 12, 2008

As you can see, I’m usually very close to the stage. I like to get to the venues a little early so I get a good spot and am able to snap nice close-up photos during the concert.

I also have a couple of J.H. video clips:

YouTube – Robot City (clip) – Juliana Hatfield live at Roseland Ballroom in NYC, December 9, 2005

YouTube – Oh (clip) – Juliana Hatfield live at Roseland Ballroom in NYC, December 9, 2005

Hatfield’s new album Peace and Love comes out February 16, 2010. I’m sure she’ll play some shows in NYC to promote it. When she does, I’ll be there. Maybe I’ll even get to take another picture with her, but if not, I’ll have enjoyed the show and that’s what counts.

Visit Juliana Hatfield’s web site: www.julianahatfield.com

Check out my other posts from Juliana Hatfield week:

Guitar Lesson – The Fact Remains by Juliana Hatfield

Guitar Lesson – Close Your Eyes by Juliana Hatfield

Guitar Lesson – Little Pieces by Juliana Hatfield

Guitar Lesson – Don’t Let Me Down by Juliana Hatfield

Revolver was The Beatles’ seventh album, originally released on August 5, 1966. Just like in my other remastered reviews, I’ve listened to the old stereo Revolver CD and the new mono and stereo remastered versions – as well as tracks from Yellow Submarine Songtrack and 1 – several times on my computer through headphones (Sony MDR-CD570) and on my home stereo system through speakers (Yamaha HTR-5540 receiver, Sony CDP-CE375 CD player, and EPI T/E 100 Series II speakers). My CD player is connected to my receiver using a digital cable. My headphones and speakers are able to reproduce clean, strong low frequencies, crisp, clear high frequencies, and an even tone in between. This isn’t the most high-end audiophile equipment ever created, but it’s a nice setup and allows me to study all of the details of the music.

How do the new remastered CDs compare to the original 1987 CD? To me, the ultimate Revolver album consists of tracks from all three versions, plus Yellow Submarine Songtrack. Read on…

The Packaging

Revolver by The Beatles (2009 mono and stereo remastered CDs, front) – click to enlarge

The remastered mono Revolver CD comes in a simple cardboard sleeve inside of a resealable clear plastic sleeve and features the original album artwork on the front and back. The disc itself comes in a plastic sleeve inside the cardboard sleeve. There’s also an Emitex paper sleeve the disc can go in, which I assume is a replica of the original vinyl record sleeve from 1966.

The remastered stereo CD comes in a foldout cardboard sleeve and features the original album artwork on the front and a slightly modified back:

Revolver by The Beatles (2009 mono and stereo remastered CDs, back) – click to enlarge

Inside the stereo foldout sleeve are more photos of the band, plus two pockets: one to hold a booklet featuring linear notes and photos and the other to hold the CD:

Revolver by The Beatles (2009 stereo remastered CD, inside) – click to enlarge

Revolver by The Beatles (2009 stereo remastered CD, inside) – click to enlarge

The disc itself now resembles the original Parlophone record label, as opposed to the 1987 disc’s no-frills treatment. Nice touch!

I like the cardboard sleeves because they introduce less plastic into our environment, but I know that if I handled them on a regular basis, they’d eventually get damaged and fall apart, whereas my plastic jewel cases from the 1980s are still in good shape. I don’t have to worry though because now that the CDs are ripped to my computer, I’ll hardly ever touch the sleeves (or the discs) again. From now on, I’ll listen to the songs on my computer, on my portable MP3 player, or by connecting my MP3 player to my stereo system.

The Remastering

The remastering on this album is very good, but could’ve been even slightly better. There’s some mild brickwall limiting, which is disappointing, but none of the peaks reach 0.0 dB, which is great, especially in today’s world of clipped and distorted music CDs. The highest peaks reach -0.32 dB on the stereo CD and -0.20 dB on the mono CD, which could still introduce distortion on some devices. Even so, this is far better mastering than any CD I’ve bought in the last decade. Here’s the waveform of the 2009 stereo remastered version of “Taxman”:

The Beatles “Taxman” stereo remastered waveform (2009) – click to enlarge

To compare, here’s the waveform from the 2009 mono remastered version of “Taxman”:

The Beatles “Taxman” mono remastered waveform (2009) – click to enlarge

Here’s the waveform from the original Revolver CD, released in stereo in 1987:

The Beatles “Taxman” 1987 stereo waveform – click to enlarge

When I adjust the peaks of the 1987 version to reach 0.0 dB, the average level is -16.76 decibels. That means the 2009 stereo version is missing 2.87 decibels of dynamic range and the 2009 mono version is missing 2.89 decibels compared to the old CD. This is disappointing because I wanted the remastered versions to preserve even more dynamic range than the old version, not less. The difference isn’t really noticeable though.

On average, the mono remastered CD is missing 1 dB of overall dynamic range compared to the Revolver CD from 1987. The stereo remastered CD is missing 1.5 dB. Again, it isn’t really noticeable.

The Songs

Here’s my rundown of the various CD versions of each song:

1. “Taxman”

MONO: The mono version sounds slightly distorted overall and lacks the high frequency clarity of the stereo version. It’s missing 2.9 dB of dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD. While it makes more sense for the drums and bass to be centered, this mix sounds messy and cluttered at times. Overall, it sounds lo-fi and old-fashioned, like a dated 1960s recording, whereas the stereo version sounds clear and fresh, like a modern recording.

The cowbell comes in earlier than in the stereo versions.

STEREO: The 2009 remaster features a boost in the low and high frequencies and a slight cut in the mid-range frequencies, which results in a more even tone compared to the old 1987 version. There’s mild brickwall limiting in the left channel, but the song sounds crisper and fresher now, though technically it’s missing 2.9 dB of dynamic range compared to the 1987 CD.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the mono vs. stereo 2009 remasters:

Listen:
Download audio file (taxman-mono-stereo.mp3)

Download:
59 second MP3 file – 2.3 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

2. “Eleanor Rigby”

MONO: The mono version is much better than “Taxman,” but still not quite as clear as the stereo version. It’s missing 2 dB of dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD.

STEREO: The 2009 stereo remaster features a slight boost in the low and high frequencies and a slight cut in the mid-range frequencies. There’s a bit more presence and clarity now. It features nearly the same amount of dynamic range as the old 1987 CD. The double-tracked vocal at the beginning of the first verse is still in this new remaster, since it was transferred from the original master tape that way. Fixing something like that would’ve required remixing or extensive editing, which this project did not involve.

The 1999 Yellow Submarine Songtrack remix is more balanced. Paul’s lead vocal is centered and the strings are panned in stereo. As a result, this version sounds more powerful and modern than the 2009 remaster. I actually prefer the tone of the vocals in the 2009 remaster, but the 1999 remix is the best sounding version overall, even though technically it’s missing 1.8 dB of dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD.

The 1 remaster from 2000 features even more of a boost in the high frequencies and a cut in the mid-range frequencies. It sounds thin and harsh and is the worst sounding version.

- – -

3. “I’m Only Sleeping”

MONO: The mono version lacks the high frequency clarity of the stereo version and is missing 1.1 dB of dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD. The vocals are softer too, and feature a subtle doubling effect. The backwards electric guitar comes in at different points throughout the song, compared to the stereo version. There’s a slightly longer fade out, as well.

STEREO: The stereo remaster features a boost in the low frequencies and a slight cut in the mid-range and high frequencies. It features nearly the same amount of dynamic range as the old 1987 CD. The bass is much stronger now. It might even be too strong.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the 1987 version (first) to the stereo remastered 2009 version (second):

Listen:
Download audio file (im-only-sl-stereo-1987-2009.mp3)

Download:
49 second MP3 file – 1.9 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

4. “Love You To”

MONO: The mono mix lacks the high frequency clarity found in the stereo version and is missing 1.9 dB of dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD. It goes on for an extra eight seconds during the outro.

STEREO: A slight low frequency rumble in the background has been removed from the 2009 stereo remaster and there’s been a slight cut in the mid-range and high frequencies, resulting in a more even tone. The song sounds a bit cleaner now. There’s nearly the same amount of dynamic range as the old 1987 CD.

The Yellow Submarine Songtrack remix is more balanced and sounds even clearer and more modern than the new stereo remaster. It’s the best sounding version and features roughly the same amount of dynamic range as the old 1987 CD.

- – -

5. “Here, There, and Everywhere”

MONO: The mono mix features some slight distortion in spots and is missing 1.3 dB of dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD, but it’s a very good, clear mix overall. The vocals are balanced better with the music. In the stereo version, the vocals are too loud. After listening to the three CDs, I prefer this mix.

STEREO: The stereo remaster features a boost in the low frequencies; the bass drum is a bit stronger now. This version is missing 2 dB of dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD, but both versions sound very similar.

- – -

6. “Yellow Submarine”

MONO: The mono mix lacks the high frequency crispness of the stereo version. It sounds dull and lacks presence overall. The mono version features roughly the same amount of dynamic range as the old 1987 CD. In this version, the song starts off with both the acoustic guitar and Ringo’s vocal, whereas the stereo version starts off with only Ringo’s vocal. During the last verse, John Lennon echos the lyric “life of ease,” which is missing in the stereo mix.

STEREO: A faint noise was removed from the left channel at the very beginning of the 2009 stereo remaster. The low and high frequencies have been boosted, resulting in a noticeable increase in presence and crispness overall. The bass drum and snare drum are more powerful. The acoustic guitar and Ringo’s vocal are bright and clear. Despite some mild brickwall limiting throughout and a 1.6 dB decrease in dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD, this is a big improvement and the best sounding version.

UPDATE November 19, 2009: For the first time ever, I noticed a tape noise after the verse with the sound effects. In the mono version, the splash of water at the end of that verse fades out quickly. I prefer the longer fade in the stereo version because the splash blends into Ringo’s vocal in the following verse. However, the longer fade also reveals the noise I’m talking about, during the word “live.” Here’s a clip:

Listen:
Download audio file (yellow-sub-stereo-noise.mp3)

Download:
7 second MP3 file – 0.3 MB (right-click to save)

The noise is in the 1987 Revolver CD as well. I can’t believe I never noticed that before! Despite this little noise, I still think the 2009 stereo remaster is the best sounding version.

The Yellow Submarine Songtrack remix features a cut in the mid-range frequencies and lacks the prescence and energy of the remastered version. It sounds a bit muted and dull, as if too much noise reduction were applied, and is missing 3.7 dB of dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD. For people who absolutely despise the hard panning in the stereo Revolver version, this remix will have to do.

The 1 version sounds like it had too much noise reduction applied and the low frequencies were over-emphasized. As a result, the overall tone sounds strange and the song lacks clarity. This is the worst sounding version and is missing 2.4 dB of dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the 1987 version (first) to the stereo 2009 version (second):

Listen:
Download audio file (yellow-sub-stereo-1987-2009.mp3)

Download:
46 second MP3 file – 1.8 MB (right-click to save)

Here’s an audio clip comparing the mono vs. stereo 2009 remasters:

Listen:
Download audio file (yellow-sub-mono-stereo.mp3)

Download:
37 second MP3 file – 1.5 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

7. “She Said She Said”

MONO: In the mono mix, whenever John sings, the drums get soft as if the engineers were using side chain compression (ducking) while mixing. This mix sounds too messy and cluttered compared to the stereo version and is missing 1.6 dB of dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD. There’s a noticeable edit at 1:13 at the end of “I said.”

STEREO: The stereo remaster features a boost in the low frequencies, a cut in the high frequencies, and a 1.6 dB decrease in dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD. This version doesn’t sound as crisp and clear. For example, the snare drum isn’t quite as audible now. I prefer the brighter 1987 version.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the 1987 version (first) to the stereo 2009 version (second):

Listen:
Download audio file (she-said-stereo-1987-2009.mp3)

Download:
49 second MP3 file – 1.9 MB (right-click to save)

Here’s an audio clip comparing the mono vs. stereo 2009 remasters:

Listen:
Download audio file (she-said-mono-stereo.mp3)

Download:
46 second MP3 file – 1.8 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

8. “Good Day Sunshine”

MONO: The mono mix features some slight distortion in spots, but is a very good, clear mix overall and features roughly the same amount of dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD. I still prefer the stereo mix though. Instead of fading out at the end, the drums stop after four bass drum beats.

STEREO: The stereo remaster features a slight boost in the low and high frequencies. The song sounds a bit more powerful and clear now, despite a 3.2 dB decrease in dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the 1987 version (first) to the stereo 2009 version (second):

Listen:
Download audio file (good-day-stereo-1987-2009.mp3)

Download:
50 second MP3 file – 1.9 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

9. “And Your Bird Can Sing”

MONO: Like “Taxman” and “She Said She Said,” there’s a bit too much going on in the mono mix, resulting in a slightly cluttered sound overall. This version features roughly the same amount of dynamic range as the old 1987 CD.

STEREO: The stereo remaster features a slight boost in the low frequencies and a 1.3 dB decrease in dynamic range. Still, it sounds nearly identical to the old 1987 CD.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the mono vs. stereo 2009 remasters:

Listen:
Download audio file (and-your-bird-mono-stereo.mp3)

Download:
53 second MP3 file – 2.0 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

10. “For No One”

MONO: There’s some slight distortion here and there throughout the mono mix, but it sounds good overall despite the 1 dB decrease in dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD. I like this mix much better than the stereo version.

STEREO: The stereo remaster features a slight boost in the low and high frequencies and roughly the same amount of dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD. The song sounds slightly clearer now, but the extreme stereo panning is annoying to listen to, even for me. In this case, I prefer the mono mix.

- – -

11. “Doctor Robert”

MONO: This is a very good, clear mono mix. I still prefer the stereo version, but this one sounds almost as good. Sometimes the vocals get drowned out by the lead guitar. There’s a 1.9 dB decrease in dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD.

STEREO: The stereo remaster features a boost in the low frequencies and a slight boost in the high frequencies. Despite a 1.1 dB decrease in dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD, this is the best sounding version.

- – -

12. “I Want to Tell You”

MONO: This is another good, clear mono mix. I still prefer the stereo version, but this one sounds almost as good. There’s a 1.7 dB decrease in dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD.

STEREO: The stereo remaster features a boost in the low and high frequencies. The song sounds crisper and clearer now and the snare drum is more audible. Despite a 1.3 dB decrease in dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD, this is the best sounding version.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the 1987 version (first) to the stereo 2009 version (second):

Listen:
Download audio file (i-want-to-stereo-1987-2009.mp3)

Download:
50 second MP3 file – 1.9 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

13. “Got to Get You into My Life”

MONO: The mono mix lacks some high frequency clarity compared to the stereo mix, but I enjoy listening to this one more. I’ve always found the stereo mix annoying. This version features roughly the same amount of dynamic range as the old 1987 CD and goes on for an extra nine seconds during the outro.

STEREO: The stereo remaster features a slight boost in the low and high frequencies. Despite a 2 dB decrease in dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD, both versions sound nearly identical. The brass and wind instruments in the right channel are too loud and stick out too much. I usually defend the Beatles’ stereo mixes, but in this case I prefer the mono mix.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the mono vs. stereo 2009 remasters:

Listen:
Download audio file (got-to-get-you-mono-stereo.mp3)

Download:
59 second MP3 file – 2.3 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

14. “Tomorrow Never Knows”

MONO: The mono mix isn’t quite as crisp and powerful as the stereo mix, but it still sounds very good overall. I prefer the wide double-tracked vocal effect in the stereo version. The mono version features an additional 2 dB of dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD. The tape loops come in at different times in certain spots in the mono version.

STEREO: The stereo remaster features a boost in the low frequencies, a slight cut in the high frequencies, and roughly the same amount of dynamic range compared to the old 1987 CD.

The Mini-Documentary

Revolver by The Beatles (2009 stereo remastered CD, mini-documentary) – click to enlarge

Included on the stereo remastered Revolver CD is a 3:55 mini-documentary that can be played on a computer. It’s comprised of moving photographs, brief studio chatter, comments from George Martin, Paul McCartney, John Lennon, Ringo Starr, and George Harrison, and one short film clip near the end. The video can be played in a small window or in a much larger “fullscreen” mode.

Even for a huge Beatles fan like me who is usually fascinated by The Beatles’ studio banter, this documentary is a letdown, devoid of any interesting insight or facts.

Revolver by The Beatles (2009 stereo remastered CD, mini-documentary) – click to enlarge

As with the other stereo Beatles remastered discs, the mini-documentary is a decent inclusion, but I really bought the new CDs to listen to the music.

Closing Comments

Is the 2009 stereo Revolver remaster worth buying if you already own the original 1987 CD? For the most part, yes. Most of the tracks sound a bit clearer, fresher, and more powerful now. The difference isn’t quite as dramatic as I was hoping for, but it’s enough of an improvement to warrant a $12 purchase.

To me, the only song that sounds slightly worse is “She Said She Said,” with its reduced high frequencies. I prefer the crisper, brighter version on the old CD.

I had listened to a crackly, worn mono version of Revolver on vinyl several years ago, but this was the first time I experienced it in high fidelity. After all of the hype I’ve come across regarding the Beatles’ mono albums, I was expecting to be completely blown away by the supposedly more powerful sound and superior mixing. However, I found some of the mono versions to sound old, cluttered, sloppy, and a bit distorted compared to the stereo ones. I know that the Beatles supervised and approved the mono mixes themselves, thus many people feel those mixes are automatically superior, but I disagree.

In terms of sound quality, tone, and overall balance, it sounds as if more care was put into the stereo mixes. The mono mixes sound like the engineers saturated the master tapes to get the loudest sound possible, perhaps at the Beatles’ insistence. The sound is often too dense and sometimes slightly distorted. The stereo mixes usually feature much better sound quality and clarity and the instruments and vocals are usually more balanced with each other.

Of course, there are exceptions. The stereo version of “For No One” is empty due to awkward hard panning and is especially annoying to listen to in headphones. The mono version is much more enjoyable. I also prefer the mono version of “Here, There, and Everywhere,” which features a better balance between the vocals and instruments and sounds stronger. Likewise for “Got to Get You into My Life.” The blaring horns in the stereo version aren’t quite as prominent in the mono mix, which sounds better as a result.

Three songs from Revolver were completely remixed from the original multitrack tapes on the 1999 Yellow Submarine Songtrack CD. The remixed “Yellow Submarine” sounds dull and lacks the energy found in the original stereo version, but “Eleanor Rigby” and “Love You To” sound much better.

The 24-bit remastered versions of “Eleanor Rigby” and “Yellow Submarine” from the 2000 1 greatest hits CD sound awful and should be avoided.

If I could only chose one version of Revolver to listen to, it’d be the remastered stereo CD. That isn’t the case though, so I’ll create my own ultimate version of the album by choosing songs from the various releases:

1. “Taxman” – stereo remaster
2. “Eleanor Rigby” – Yellow Submarine Songtrack remix
3. “I’m Only Sleeping” – stereo remaster
4. “Love You To” – Yellow Submarine Songtrack remix
5. “Here, There, and Everywhere” – mono remaster
6. “Yellow Submarine” – stereo remaster
7. “She Said She Said” – original 1987 CD
8. “Good Day Sunshine” – stereo remaster
9. “And Your Bird Can Sing” – stereo remaster
10. “For No One” – mono remaster
11. “Doctor Robert” – stereo remaster
12. “I Want to Tell You” – stereo remaster
13. “Got to Get You into My Life” – mono remaster
14. “Tomorrow Never Knows” – stereo remaster

As with Abbey Road, the biggest difference between the old and new stereo CDs is loudness. The peaks in the remastered CD are higher than in the 1987 one, so basically, if you turn the volume up a notch or two while playing your old 1987 Revolver CD, it’ll sound somewhat close to the remastered version. Don’t get me wrong, the new stereo CD definitely sounds better overall, but if you can’t afford it or don’t want to buy it, the old CD still holds up pretty well.

(By comparison, the new remastered versions of Please Please Me sound vastly superior to the original 1987 CD.)

Check out my other Beatles remastered CD reviews:

Beatles Review – Please Please Me Remastered CDs
Beatles Review – Abbey Road Remastered CD

In the meantime, check out my Please Please Me and Abbey Road reviews, if you haven’t already.

UPDATE November 16, 2009: I just posted my Revolver 1987 vs. 2009, mono vs. stereo review: Beatles Review – Revolver Remastered CDs. I hope you find it useful!

I’ve also been working on a non-music-related web project of my own, which I’ll unveil soon. I’m really excited about it! If you’re a big reader, then you’ll be very interested in my project.

I’m hoping to have my next remastered Beatles review up late tomorrow night…and I’ve decided to break chronological order.

Please Please Me was The Beatles’ first album, originally released in England on March 22, 1963. Just like in my Abbey Road remastered review, I’ve listened to the old mono Please Please Me CD and the new mono and stereo remastered versions – as well as the stereo versions of each song from the 2004 and 2006 The Capitol Albums boxed sets – several times on my computer through headphones (Sony MDR-CD570) and on my home stereo system through speakers (Yamaha HTR-5540 receiver, JVC XV-523 DVD/CD player, and EPI T/E 100 Series II speakers). Just to recap, the audio from my DVD player is connected to my receiver using a digital cable. My headphones and speakers are able to reproduce clean, strong low frequencies, crisp, clear high frequencies, and an even tone in between. I know this isn’t the most expensive, high-end audiophile equipment ever created, but it’s still a nice setup and allows me to study all of the details of the music I’m listening to.

While the remastered Abbey Road CD sounded very similar to the 1987 one and left me disappointed, the remastered Please Please Me CDs sound mostly better than the previously released one. Read on…

The Packaging

Please Please Me by The Beatles (2009 mono and stereo remastered CDs, front) – click to enlarge

The remastered mono Please Please Me CD comes in a simple cardboard sleeve inside of a resealable clear plastic sleeve and features the original album artwork on the front and back. The disc itself comes in a plastic sleeve inside the cardboard sleeve. There’s also an Emitex paper sleeve the disc can go in, which I assume is a replica of the original vinyl record sleeve from 1963:

Please Please Me by The Beatles (2009 mono remastered CD, Emitex paper sleeve) – click to enlarge

The remastered stereo CD comes in a foldout cardboard sleeve and features the original album artwork on the front, but a redesigned back:

Please Please Me by The Beatles (2009 mono vs. stereo remastered CDs, back) – click to enlarge

Inside the stereo foldout sleeve are more photos of the band, plus two pockets: one to hold a booklet featuring linear notes and photos and the other to hold the CD:

Please Please Me by The Beatles (2009 stereo remastered CD, inside) – click to enlarge

Please Please Me by The Beatles (2009 stereo remastered CD, inside) – click to enlarge

The disc itself now resembles the original Parlophone record label, as opposed to the 1987 disc’s no-frills treatment. Nice touch!

Again, I like the cardboard sleeves because they introduce less plastic into our environment, but I know that if I handled them on a regular basis, they’d eventually get damaged and fall apart, whereas my plastic jewel cases from the 1980s are still in good shape. I don’t have to worry though because now that the CDs are ripped to my computer, I’ll hardly ever touch the sleeves (or the discs) again. From now on, I’ll listen to the songs on my computer, listen to them on my portable MP3 player, or connect my MP3 player to my stereo system and listen to them that way.

The Remastering

The remastering on this album is probably the best it’s going to get. There’s no brickwall limiting (for the most part) and none of the peaks reach 0.0 dB, which is great, especially in today’s world of clipped and distorted music CDs. The highest peaks reach -0.3 dB on the stereo CD and -0.09 dB on the mono CD, which could still introduce distortion on some devices, but this is far better mastering than any CD I’ve bought in the last decade or so. Here’s the waveform of the 2009 stereo remastered version of “Twist and Shout”:

The Beatles “Twist and Shout” stereo remastered waveform (2009) – click to enlarge

To compare, here’s the waveform from the stereo remastered version of “Twist and Shout” on The Early Beatles CD, released in 2006 in The Capitol Albums, Volume 2 boxed set:

The Beatles “Twist and Shout” The Early Beatles stereo remastered waveform (2006) – click to enlarge

The Capitol Albums boxed sets were definitely victims of the loudness war. That version of “Twist and Shout” is missing 3.56 decibels of dynamic range compared to the 2009 remastered version, plus the low and high frequencies have been boosted too much.

Here’s the waveform from the original mono Please Please Me CD, released in 1987:

The Beatles “Twist and Shout” 1987 mono waveform – click to enlarge

When I adjust the peaks of the 1987 version to reach 0.0 dB, the average level is -12.08 decibels. That means the 2009 mono version features an additional 0.41 decibels of dynamic range and the stereo version features an additional 2.14 decibels. That’s great!

On average, the mono remastered CD features an additional 0.5 dB of overall dynamic range compared to the Please Please Me CD from 1987 and the stereo remastered CD features an additional 3 dB of overall dynamic range compared to the stereo The Early Beatles CD from 2006.

The Songs

Here’s my rundown of the various CD versions of each song:

1. “I Saw Her Standing There”

MONO: The 1987 and 2009 remastered versions sound very similar and feature roughly the same amount of dynamic range. The remastered version has a slightly longer fadeout, which reveals a faint click or drum stick noise at the very end.

STEREO: The version on the Meet the Beatles CD from The Capitol Albums, Volume 1 boxed set is severely compressed and features a significant boost in the low and high frequencies, which makes the song sound too harsh and causes a low frequency rumble throughout. The 2009 remastered version features an additional 3.12 dB of dynamic range and the rumble is no longer present. It’s the better sounding version.

A brief drumstick click or hi-hat tap in the left channel at the very beginning of the 2006 stereo version has been removed in the 2009 stereo version.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the stereo 2006 version (first) to the stereo remastered 2009 version (second). In the very beginning of this clip, you can hear the click/tap in the left channel:

Listen:
Download audio file (i-saw-her-stereo-2006-2009.mp3)

Download:
50 second MP3 file – 1.9 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

2. “Misery”

MONO: The 2009 remastered version features a boost in the low and high frequencies. It sounds a bit crisper and more powerful than the 1987 version. Also, the 1987 version features minor tape dropout in the intro, which has been fixed in the 2009 version. The 2009 version features a slightly longer fade-out, which reveals a faint noise at the very end, like someone dropped something. Both versions feature roughly the same amount of dynamic range.

STEREO: The remastered version sounds very good, but I noticed some hard limiting in the right channel during the piano sections. It’s fairly minor, but I feel the need to point it out. “Misery” hasn’t been released in stereo on CD before, so I have no other version to compare this one to.

- – -

3. “Anna (Go To Him)”

MONO: The 2009 remastered version has a slight boost in the high frequencies and sounds a bit clearer now. Both versions feature roughly the same amount of dynamic range.

STEREO: The version on The Early Beatles CD from The Capitol Albums, Volume 2 boxed set is severely compressed and features an extreme boost in the low and high frequencies. That version sounds crisp and powerful, but a bit harsh. The 2009 version features an additional 4.86 dB of dynamic range and less distortion. It doesn’t sound as modern or as forceful as the Capitol version, but it’s easier on the ears.

Part of me prefers the Capitol version’s more rock-oriented equalization, even though I know the new remastered version is technically far superior. Maybe I’ll change my mind as I get used to the new version.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the stereo 2006 version (first) to the stereo remastered 2009 version (second):

Listen:
Download audio file (anna-go-to-stereo-2006-2009.mp3)

Download:
49 second MP3 file – 1.9 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

4. “Chains”

MONO: The 2009 remastered version has a boost in the high frequencies and sounds clearer now. The vocals and hi-hats are crisper and have more prescence. This version is much better than the old 1987 version. Also, the fadeout is slightly longer now. Both versions feature roughly the same amount of dynamic range.

STEREO: The version on The Early Beatles CD features an extreme boost in the low and high frequencies, so at first, it seems clearer and more powerful than the new 2009 version. However, the 2009 version features an additional 3.03 dB of dynamic range, less distortion, and sounds less harsh and aggressive.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the mono vs. stereo 2009 remasters:

Listen:
Download audio file (chains-mono-stereo.mp3)

Download:
59 second MP3 file – 2.3 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

5. “Boys”

MONO: The 2009 remastered version has a slight boost in the high frequencies and sounds slightly clearer than the old 1987 version. It also features an additional 0.83 dB of dynamic range.

STEREO: The version on The Early Beatles CD features an extreme boost in the low and high frequencies, so at first, it seems clearer and more powerful than the new 2009 version. However, the 2009 version features an additional 5.14 dB of dynamic range, less distortion, and sounds less harsh and aggressive. Here’s an audio clip comparing the stereo 2006 version (first) to the stereo remastered 2009 version (second):

Listen:
Download audio file (boys-stereo-2006-2009.mp3)

Download:
50 second MP3 file – 1.9 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

6. “Ask Me Why”

MONO: The 1987 and 2009 remastered versions sound nearly identical, but the remaster seems to have a very slight boost in the high frequencies. Minor vocal plosives around 0:52 and 1:52 (the “p” in “happened”) were reduced in the remastered version. Both versions feature roughly the same amount of dynamic range.

I noticed something weird in the 2009 version. From 1:26 to 2:10, I hear an intermittent grating, high-pitched tape defect or distortion that isn’t present in the 1987 version or the stereo version. It sounds similar to fingernails scratching a blackboard. Does anyone else hear that noise? It’s faint, but it’s most noticeable around 1:26 and around 2:07.

STEREO: The version on The Early Beatles CD is severely compressed and features an extreme boost in the low and high frequencies, which makes the song sound too harsh. The 2009 version features an additional 3.88 dB of dynamic range and less distortion. It’s the better sounding version.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the 1987 version (first) to the mono 2009 version (second). Listen for the weird high-pitched distortion around 27 seconds into the clip and onward (headphones should help):

Listen:
Download audio file (ask-me-why-mono-1987-2009.mp3)

Download:
49 second MP3 file – 1.9 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

7. “Please Please Me”

MONO: The 2009 remastered version is much, much clearer than the 1987 version, especially in the high frequencies. The tone is more evenly balanced now, there’s more presence, and there’s less distortion. The 1987 version had over-emphasized mid-range frequencies, weak high frequencies, and sounded awful, as if it were recorded off an old transistor radio. Was the 1987 version the result of too much noise reduction? If so, that doesn’t make sense because there isn’t an unusual amount of tape hiss in the remastered version. Both versions feature roughly the same amount of dynamic range.

STEREO: The version on The Early Beatles CD features a boost in the low and high frequencies. This makes the song sound more modern, but it also makes it sound too harsh. The 2009 version features an additional 2.52 dB of dynamic range and much less distortion. As a result, the harmonica overdubs are more noticeable now, but it’s the better sounding version overall.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the 1987 version (first) to the mono 2009 version (second):

Listen:
Download audio file (please-pleas-mono-1987-2009.mp3)

Download:
58 second MP3 file – 2.2 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

8. “Love Me Do”

MONO: The 2009 remastered version sounds clearer than the 1987 version. Like “Please Please Me,” the tone is more evenly balanced, there’s more presence, and everything sounds more defined and crisp. Again, it seems like the 1987 version had too much noise reduction applied, which is strange because there isn’t an unusual amount of tape hiss in the remastered version. Either that, or the tone in the old version was just very poorly equalized. It sounds much better now. Both versions feature roughly the same amount of dynamic range.

STEREO: A stereo mix of “Love Me Do” doesn’t exist. In the version on The Early Beatles CD, the high frequencies have been cut in the left channel and the low frequencies have been cut in the right channel in an attempt to simulate stereo. This mock stereo technique doesn’t work and ends up sounding annoying, especially in headphones.

The mono remastered version on the 1 CD from 2000 sounds very good, but is slightly thin compared to the 2009 version. This new version is probably the best sounding version we’re going to get. Just to clarify, the stereo remastered Please Please Me CD features “Love Me Do” in mono.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the 1987 version (first) to the mono 2009 version (second):

Listen:
Download audio file (love-me-do-mono-1987-2009.mp3)

Download:
42 second MP3 file – 1.6 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

9. “P.S. I Love You”

MONO: The 2009 remastered version features a boost in the high frequencies and a more balanced tone overall. It sounds much clearer and fresher than the old 1987 version. Once again, my guess is too much noise reduction was applied to the 1987 version, though there isn’t an unusual amount of tape hiss in the remastered version, so I don’t understand why. Both versions feature roughly the same amount of dynamic range.

The remastered version fades out slightly faster than the 1987 version.

STEREO: A stereo mix of “P.S. I Love You” doesn’t exist. In the version on The Early Beatles CD, the high frequencies have been cut in the left channel and the low frequencies have been cut in the right channel in an attempt to simulate stereo. Like that version of “Love Me Do,” this mock stereo technique doesn’t work and ends up sounding annoying, especially in headphones.

Again, this new 2009 version is probably the best sounding version we’re going to get. Just to clarify, the stereo remastered Please Please Me CD features “P.S. I Love You” in mono.

- – -

10. “Baby It’s You”

MONO: The 1987 and 2009 remastered versions sound nearly identical and feature roughly the same amount of dynamic range. The remastered version has a slight boost in the high frequencies and sounds slightly clearer now. The remastered version also features a slightly longer fadeout.

STEREO: The version on The Early Beatles CD is over-compressed and features a significant boost in the low and high frequencies, which makes the song sound too harsh. The 2009 version features an additional 2.32 dB of dynamic range and less distortion. It’s the better sounding version.

- – -

11. “Do You Want to Know a Secret”

MONO: The 1987 and 2009 remastered versions sound nearly identical and feature roughly the same amount of dynamic range. Low frequency rumble/hum was removed from the intro in the remastered version.

STEREO: As usual, the version on The Early Beatles CD is over-compressed and features a significant boost in the low and high frequencies, which makes the song sound too harsh. The 2009 version features an additional 2.11 dB of dynamic range and less distortion. A low frequency rumble/hum has been removed from the intro as well. It’s the better sounding version.

- – -

12. “A Taste of Honey”

MONO: The 2009 remastered version features a very slight boost in the high frequencies and a slight cut in the mid-range frequencies, plus it features an additional 2.5 dB of dynamic range. As a result, it sounds a bit crisper and more balanced than the 1987 version.

STEREO: As usual, the version on The Early Beatles CD is over-compressed and features a significant boost in the low and high frequencies, which makes it sound too harsh. The 2009 version features an additional 2.25 dB of dynamic range and less distortion. It’s the better sounding version.

A faint creaking noise during the fadeout in The Early Beatles CD version has been removed from the 2009 remaster.

- – -

13. “There’s a Place”

MONO: The 1987 and 2009 remastered versions sound nearly identical, though the remastered version features an additional 1.4 dB of dynamic range.

STEREO: The remastered version sounds very good, just like the other songs on the new CD. “There’s a Place” hasn’t been released in stereo on CD before, so I have no other version to compare this one to.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the mono vs. stereo 2009 remasters:

Listen:
Download audio file (theres-a-place-mono-stereo.mp3)

Download:
59 second MP3 file – 2.3 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

14. “Twist and Shout”

MONO: The remastered version has a slight boost in the low and high frequencies and sounds a bit clearer and more powerful than the old 1987 version. Both versions feature roughly the same amount of dynamic range.

STEREO: The version on The Early Beatles CD is severely compressed and features an extreme boost in the low and high frequencies. In a way, it seems clearer and more powerful than the new 2009 version. However, the 2009 version features an additional 3.56 dB of dynamic range and less distortion. As a result, it’s more pleasing to listen to.

The Mini-Documentary

Please Please Me by The Beatles (2009 stereo remastered CD, mini-documentary) – click to enlarge

Included on the stereo remastered Please Please Me CD is a 3:50 mini-documentary that can be played on a computer. It’s comprised of film clips, moving photographs, brief studio chatter, and comments from George Martin, Paul McCartney, John Lennon, Ringo Starr, and George Harrison. The video can be played in a small window or in a much larger “fullscreen” mode.

For someone like me who’s a huge Beatles fan, the best part of the documentary was getting to hear the few snippets of studio chatter and seeing several seconds of The Beatles performing at The Cavern.

Please Please Me by The Beatles (2009 stereo remastered CD, mini-documentary) – click to enlarge

As with Abbey Road, the mini-documentary is a nice inclusion, but don’t expect more than a few interesting photos and sound bites. I don’t mind though, because I bought the new CDs to listen to the music.

Closing Comments

After I reviewed the new Abbey Road CD, part of me was afraid to listen to the rest of the remastered albums. Would they all sound so similar to the original 1987 CDs? Did I waste my money by buying all of these new versions? In the case of Please Please Me, I’m happy to report the answer is no.

The new mono and stereo CDs sound great, but they aren’t 100% perfect. There’s a touch of brickwall limiting in the stereo version of “Misery.” This is the first time “Misery” is available on CD in stereo, which is great, but I still have to point out the minor shortcoming. There’s also a grating, high-pitched tape defect or distortion in parts of the mono version of “Ask Me Why,” which isn’t present in the 1987 version or the stereo remastered version. It’s strange and I really want to know if anyone else notices it.

Either way, I’ll be replacing the new mono “Ask Me Why” with the 1987 version on my portable MP3 player. They sound very similar otherwise, so it’s not a big deal.

Should you drop everything, rush to the store, and immediately buy this new CD? If you’re a fan of the stereo mixes, then yes. The stereo CD sounds great overall. Compared to the versions in The Capitol Albums boxed sets, the tone is more balanced and the album has been mastered much more sensitively, preserving several decibels more dynamic range.

If you aren’t a fan of the stereo mixes and you don’t plan on buying the mono boxed set, then you’ll have to be satisfied with the mostly inferior 1987 CD. Other than the weird noise throughout the second half of “Ask Me Why,” the mono remastered CD sounds crisper, clearer, and fresher, especially “Please Please Me,” “Love Me Do,” and “P.S. I Love You.” It’s too bad it isn’t available separately.

I still prefer the stereo mixes because I can hear the instruments more clearly and there’s a sense of space that mono just can’t provide. However, these clearer mono mixes are growing on me and are much more enjoyable to listen to than the 1987 versions. At this point, it’s a matter of personal preference, as both remastered versions sound fantastic overall.

With Abbey Road, the biggest difference between the old and new CDs was loudness. With Please Please Me, the loudness between the 1987 CD and the new 2009 CDs is very similar. In this case, the biggest difference is an increase in clarity – some songs much more than others.

My faith in this whole remastering project has been restored and I’m excited to compare the rest of the CDs. I’ll post my next review soon!

I just got back from the post office after waiting in line for what seemed like an hour. Finally, I have the Beatles mono and stereo remastered CD boxed sets:

Flickr – Unboxing my Beatles boxed sets, Jersey City, NJ 9/17/09

The two sets contain 29 CDs in all, plus one booklet and one DVD. The mono set contains 11 albums (13 CDs) and the booklet. The stereo set contains 14 albums (16 CDs) and the mini-documentary DVD. (The Beatles and Past Masters are double albums included in both sets.)

The mono CDs and booklet come packaged in a square glossy white box. The section that actually holds the discs and booklet slides in and out. It’s clean and simple.

The stereo CDs and documentary DVD come packaged in a rectangular glossy black foldout box. There are little magnets embedded in the flap and the side of the box, so it “snaps” shut. I like that. The discs are stored in two wells, each one featuring a ribbon that can be pulled up for easy access to the discs at the bottom without ruining their cardboard sleeves. I like that, too.

It turns out the CDs in the stereo boxed set come in the same foldout cardboard sleeves as the individual versions. The mono CDs come in simple cardboard sleeves inside resealable clear plastic sleeves.

As you can see in my Flickr photo set, the mono and stereo versions of the Beatles’ albums feature different layouts on the back. It seems like the backs of the mono CDs feature the original vinyl artwork, while the backs of most of the stereo CDs have been redesigned. Am I correct?

2009 mono (left) vs. stereo (right) CD backs, click each to enlarge

I still have some work I need to finish this afternoon, but I will post my review of another one of the albums tomorrow. Just like in my Abbey Road review, I’ll post plenty of pictures, waveforms, and audio comparison samples for each CD.

Which album should I tackle next?

I still have about a week to go before my Beatles boxed sets arrive, but in the meantime, I broke down and bought the remastered version of Abbey Road (originally released in 1969) for $13 at J&R Music World, just so I’ll know what to expect from this whole project and to let everyone know how it compares to the original 1987 CD.

I’ve listened to the old Abbey Road CD and this new remastered version several times on my computer through headphones (Sony MDR-CD570) and on my home stereo system through speakers (Yamaha HTR-5540 receiver, JVC XV-523 DVD/CD player, and EPI T/E 100 Series II speakers). The audio from my DVD player is connected to my receiver using an optical digital cable. My headphones and speakers are able to reproduce clean, strong low frequencies, crisp, clear high frequencies, and an even tone in between. True, this isn’t the most expensive, high-end audiophile equipment ever created, but it’s still a nice setup and allows me to study all of the details of the music I’m listening to.

With all of the hype and praise surrounding the Beatles remasters, I was expecting to be blown away by the improvement in sound quality on the 2009 CD vs. the 1987 CD. As much as I want to believe that this new version is a huge improvement, it simply isn’t. A few of the songs sound slightly better, a few of the songs sound identical, and a few of the songs sound slightly worse. Read on…

The Packaging

Abbey Road by The Beatles (1987 CD vs. 2009 remastered CD, front) – click to enlarge

I don’t know how it’s packaged in the boxed set (UPDATE September 22, 2009: the stereo CDs are packaged the same individually as they are in the boxed set), but the individual remastered Abbey Road CD comes in a foldout cardboard sleeve and features the original album artwork on the front and back. The CD that was released in 1987 features a slightly cropped version of the front of the album and a severely cropped version of the back:

Abbey Road by The Beatles (1987 CD vs. 2009 remastered CD, back) – click to enlarge

I like the cardboard sleeve because it introduces less plastic into our environment, but I know that if I handled it on a regular basis, it’d eventually get damaged and fall apart, whereas my plastic jewel cases from the 1980s are still in good shape. I don’t have to worry though because now that the CD is ripped to my computer, I’ll hardly ever touch the sleeve (or the disc) again. From now on, I’ll listen to the songs on my computer, listen to them on my portable MP3 player, or connect my MP3 player to my stereo system and listen to them that way.

Inside the sleeve are more photos of the band, plus two pockets: one to hold a booklet featuring linear notes and photos and the other to hold the CD. It also includes an advertisement for the boxed sets and The Beatles: Rock Band video game:

Abbey Road by The Beatles (2009 remastered CD, inside) – click to enlarge

Abbey Road by The Beatles (2009 remastered CD, inside) – click to enlarge

The disc itself now resembles “Side 1″ of an old Apple record label, as opposed to the 1987 disc’s no-frills treatment. Nice touch!

The Remastering

On a technical level, the remastering on this album has put my mind at ease regarding the loudness war. There’s no obvious brickwall limiting and none of the peaks reach 0.0 dB, which is great, especially in today’s world of clipped and distorted music CDs. The highest peaks on this album reach -0.24 dB, which could still introduce distortion on some devices, but this is far better mastering than any CD I’ve bought in the last decade or so. Here’s the waveform of the 2009 remastered version of “Come Together”:

The Beatles “Come Together” remastered waveform (2009) – click to enlarge

To compare, here’s the waveform of “The Fact Remains” from Juliana Hatfield’s 2008 CD How to Walk Away:

Juliana Hatfield “The Fact Remains” waveform (2008) – click to enlarge

As you can see, “Come Together” by The Beatles was properly mastered and “The Fact Remains” by Juliana Hatfield wasn’t. “The Fact Remains” is a catchy, straightforward pop rock song, not a hard-core heavy metal song, so why is it 3.26 decibels louder than “Come Together”? That extra loudness came at the expense of dynamic range and sound quality. It’s another case of a great song ruined by poor mastering.

Here’s the waveform from the digitally remastered version of “Come Together” on the Beatles 1 CD, released in 2000:

The Beatles “Come Together” 1 remastered waveform (2000) – click to enlarge

The 1 CD was definitely a victim of the loudness war. That version of “Come Together” is missing 3.57 decibels of dynamic range compared to the 2009 remastered version and the peaks reach -0.01 dB instead of -0.37 dB. It’s even slightly louder than “The Fact Remains.” Additionally, there’s a boost in the mid-range frequencies that isn’t present in the 1987 or 2009 versions. This is easily the worst sounding version of the three.

For comparison’s sake, here’s the waveform from the original Abbey Road CD, released in 1987:

The Beatles “Come Together” 1987 waveform – click to enlarge

When I adjust the peaks of the 1987 version to reach 0.0 dB, the average level is -15.36 decibels. That means the 1987 version features an additional 1.37 decibels of dynamic range vs. the 2009 remaster. In theory, this is disappointing because I wanted the remastered version to preserve even more dynamic range than the old version, not less. In reality though, the difference is so small that it isn’t noticeable.

The Songs

Here’s my rundown of the various CD versions of each song:

1. “Come Together”

The 1987 CD version features the most dynamic range and has the most even, balanced tone. The low frequencies are clear and the song sounds crisp and alive. The 2009 remastered version features almost as much dynamic range as the 1987 version and sounds nearly identical. I noticed a very slight boost in the low frequencies and a very slight cut in the high frequencies. Overall, the bass and drums are slightly less defined and the song is slightly less crisp. This version still sounds good, but it isn’t an improvement over the old version.

The 1 version from 2000 features the least dynamic range and the mid-range frequencies have been boosted. As a result, the drums and bass lack the warmth and impact from the 1987 version and the song lacks clarity overall. The bluesy, mysterious magic is gone. This is the worst sounding version of the three.

- – -

2. “Something”

The 2009 version features just as much dynamic range as the 1987 version. I noticed a very slight boost in low frequencies, high frequencies, and overall presence, resulting in a slight improvement over the old version. The snare drum and vocals are definitely crisper now. Also, it’s barely noticeable, but the left channel is slightly louder and the right channel is slightly softer than before.

Again, the 1 version from 2000 features the least dynamic range out of the three.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the 1987 version (first) to the remastered 2009 version (second):

Listen:
Download audio file (something-1987-2009-clip.mp3)

Download:
30 second MP3 file – 1.2 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

3. “Maxwell’s Silver Hammer”

The 2009 and 1987 versions sound almost identical and feature nearly the same amount of dynamic range. The remaster features a slight boost in the low frequencies and a slight cut in the high frequencies.

- – -

4. “Oh! Darling”

The remastered version features nearly as much dynamic range as the 1987 version. The tone is slightly more balanced, with a tiny boost in the low frequencies and a tiny cut in the mid-range and high frequencies. The new version is a minor improvement over the old version, but it’s barely noticeable. Here’s an audio clip comparing the 1987 version (first) to the remastered 2009 version (second):

Listen:
Download audio file (oh-darling-1987-2009-clip.mp3)

Download:
34 second MP3 file – 1.3 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

5. “Octopus’s Garden”

Once again, the remastered version sounds almost identical to the 1987 version and both feature the same amount of dynamic range. The remastered version features a slight boost in the high frequencies. Also, the left channel is slightly louder and the right channel is slightly softer than before, so the lead guitar is more centered now. I suppose the 2009 version is an improvement overall, but just barely.

- – -

6. “I Want You (She’s So Heavy)”

Even though the remastered version is missing 1.35 dB of dynamic range compared to the 1987 version, they both sound nearly identical.

Also, one of my readers Wayne pointed out to me: from roughly 16 seconds to 17.5 seconds, the 1987 version features an extremely subtle hum in the low frequencies that was removed from the 2009 remastered version. When I listen very closely to the old version, I can hear the faint hum and Ringo keeping the beat softly in the left channel during the rest after John’s “I want you…” In the new version, the hum is gone, which is fine, but Ringo’s soft tapping has become practically inaudible. It doesn’t ruin the song at all, but I thought it was worth mentioning anyway.

Here’s an audio clip comparing the 1987 version (first) to the remastered 2009 version (second). Listen closely for Ringo’s tapping around six seconds in:

Listen:
Download audio file (i-want-you-1987-2009-clip.mp3)

Download:
27 second MP3 file – 1.0 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

7. “Here Comes the Sun”

The remastered version is missing 2.05 dB of dynamic range compared to the 1987 version. There’s also a very slight boost in the low frequencies. Overall though, both versions sound nearly identical.

- – -

8. “Because”

The remastered and 1987 versions feature roughly the same amount of dynamic range. Overall, both versions sound nearly identical.

- – -

9. “You Never Give Me Your Money”

Even though the remastered version is missing 0.95 dB of dynamic range compared to the 1987 version, they both sound nearly identical.

- – -

10. “Sun King”

In this case, the remastered version features a 0.78 dB increase in dynamic range compared to the 1987 version. Overall, both versions sound nearly identical.

- – -

11. “Mean Mr. Mustard”

The remastered version is missing 1.48 dB of dynamic range compared to the 1987 version. There’s also a slight cut in the high frequencies. As a result, the song doesn’t sound as crisp as the old version, especially the drums. Here’s an audio clip comparing the 1987 version (first) to the remastered 2009 version (second):

Listen:
Download audio file (mean-mr-must-1987-2009-clip.mp3)

Download:
32 second MP3 file – 1.3 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

12. “Polythene Pam”

The remastered and 1987 versions feature roughly the same amount of dynamic range. There’s a very slight cut in the high frequencies, but both versions sound nearly identical.

- – -

13. “She Came in Through the Bathroom Window”

Again, the remastered and 1987 versions feature the same amount of dynamic range. In the remastered version, there’s a slight boost in the low frequencies and a slight cut in the high frequencies. I noticed the remastered version sounds duller than the 1987 version. The old version sounds crisper and punchier, especially the drums, percussion, and vocals. Here’s an audio clip comparing the 1987 version (first) to the remastered 2009 version (second):

Listen:
Download audio file (she-came-in-t-1987-2009-clip.mp3)

Download:
34 second MP3 file – 1.3 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

14. “Golden Slumbers”

Even though the remastered version is missing 0.82 dB of dynamic range compared to the 1987 version, they sound nearly identical.

- – -

15. “Carry That Weight”

Even though the remastered version is missing 0.7 dB of dynamic range compared to the 1987 version, they sound nearly identical.

- – -

16. “The End”

The remastered version is missing 1.19 dB of dynamic range compared to the 1987 version. There’s also a slight boost in the low frequencies and a slight cut in the mid-range frequencies. Also, the left channel is slightly louder and the right channel is slightly softer than before.

Overall, the section with the guitar solos doesn’t sound as crisp now. The three guitars sound slightly duller and quieter, the snare drum isn’t as defined, and the hi-hats have a bit less presence. This version isn’t bad, but it isn’t quite as clear and exciting as the old one. Here’s an audio clip comparing the 1987 version (first) to the remastered 2009 version (second):

Listen:
Download audio file (the-end-1987-2009-clip.mp3)

Download:
35 second MP3 file – 1.3 MB (right-click to save)

- – -

17. “Her Majesty”

In this case, the remastered version features a 1.4 dB increase in dynamic range compared to the 1987 version. Overall, both versions sound nearly identical.

The Mini-Documentary

Abbey Road by The Beatles (2009 remastered CD, mini-documentary) – click to enlarge

Included on the remastered Abbey Road CD is a 3:53 mini-documentary that can be played on a computer. It’s comprised of film clips, moving photographs, brief studio outtakes, and comments from Paul McCartney, George Martin, John Lennon, Ringo Starr, and George Harrison. The video can be played in a small window or in a much larger “fullscreen” mode.

For someone like me who’s a huge Beatles fan, the best part of the documentary was getting to hear outtakes I’ve never heard before. I’m fascinated by that kind of behind-the-scenes audio from their recording sessions and would love it if more was available. I know most people would find this pointless and borderline psychotic, but I bet I could listen to every Beatles tape in EMI’s vault from beginning to end, take after take, and not get bored.

Abbey Road by The Beatles (2009 remastered CD, mini-documentary) – click to enlarge

The mini-documentary is a nice inclusion, but don’t expect more than a few interesting photos and sound bites. It’s okay though, I bought the CD to listen to the music.

Closing Comments

The Beatles remasters have been praised so much these last two weeks that I was expecting to experience this album like never before. I wanted so badly for that to be true, but it just isn’t the case. I was planning on posting waveform comparison images of every song from both versions of the album, but they look so similar to each other after being normalized that there’s no point.

Yes, three songs sound slightly better now (“Something,” “Oh! Darling,” and “Octopus’s Garden”), but three songs sound slightly worse (“Mean Mr. Mustard,” “She Came in Through the Bathroom Window,” and “The End”). I’m on the fence about “Come Together.” I prefer the slightly more defined bass and drums in the 1987 version, but I know that a lot of people prefer more emphasized bass these days, even if it means sacrificing some low end clarity.

Should you drop everything, rush to the store, and immediately buy this new CD? Not necessarily. If you already own the old Abbey Road CD, you’re fine. You aren’t missing out on anything major, which means either the new CD could’ve been mastered better or the old CD was mastered almost perfectly.

The reviewers and fans who claim this new version sounds better than ever haven’t listened to the old version recently, because that version still sounds fantastic. The biggest difference between the two CDs is loudness. Most of the songs on both versions feature roughly the same amount of dynamic range, but the peaks in the remastered CD are higher than in the 1987 one. What does that mean? Basically, if you turn the volume up a notch or two while playing your 1987 Abbey Road CD, it’ll mostly sound just as good as (and in a few cases better than) the remastered version.

At first, I was disappointed that this new, hyped up version sounded almost identical to the supposedly inferior 1987 version, but then I realized the Beatles’ earlier albums probably benefited from the remastering much more than Abbey Road did. I can only assume albums like Please Please Me, With the Beatles, and Beatles for Sale were mastered more sensitively than their Capitol Albums Vol. 1 and Vol. 2 counterparts and were transferred from even better sources. I have a feeling those will be some of the real gems of this four-year-long project. I’ll find out once my boxed sets arrive.