Beatles Remasters: Mono vs. Stereo Debate Thread


On September 9th, the entire Beatles catalog will be released in both mono and stereo remastered versions.

The issue of this thread is simply mono or stereo, and why? I only have the stereo CD versions that were available in the mid to late 1990s. I am too young to remember the original releases.

Until the albums are released, I'd like to get your take on the issue based on what has been on the market up to this point. After they are released, I'd like to hear from people who purchase either the stereo, mono, or both of the new reissues.

What are the pros and cons of the different mixes? Which do you plan on purchasing, if any? Discuss.
blackstonejd

Showing 3 responses by mikelavigne

i purchased both the Mono and Stereo box sets on the 9th.....and have been playing around for the last week listening to many of them. the recording notes have been facinating. i've done some comparisons between the mono and stereo versions as well as to the late 80's CD's. just tonight i did drag out one of my MOFI reissue Lps for comparison.

first; i've really enjoyed re-immersing myself in the whole Beatles catalog. i'm 58 years old, my first Lp ever was Beatles 65' when i was 14. i graduated from H.S. in 1969, so the Beatles were in the sweet spot for me when i was coming of age. and i'm a total fan on many levels. my kids (who are now in their 30's) became Beatles fans as they grew up. i now own three different Beatles Lp sets as well as assorted other pressings.

anyway; the new sets are somewhat better to dramatically better than the 80's CD's. overall i prefer the Stereo set; but there is a magic to the Monos which i like. my recommendation would be to purchase the Mono set and then fill in the last three Stereo cds. (there are 2 Albums in the Mono set which also have the stereo tracks; Help and Rubber Soul. it's interesting to be able to very quickly switch from Mono to these stereo tracks).

oh and by the way; the MOFI Lp (of the White Album) absolutely wipes the floor with the Mono Cd of the same. not in any way close. OTOH the music is great in any format.
Abruce, i always enjoy room-filling sound. my particular room is quite lively and allows lots of bloom and detail. there is an engagement and immersive aspect to the Stereo versions which i like. OTOH from a performance standpoint the Monos are more 'believable' as performances.

heart verses head so to speak. and music is first emotional to me.

of course; i only have the Stereo vinyl versions. maybe if i owned the mono Lp versions my viewpoint might be different.
Mapman, yes, i've got all the whole Anthology set and 'Live at the BBC' too. i've not gone thru them in years. when i find the time i'll go thru them and listen to the relevant cuts.....thanks for the suggestion.

personally; i value a simple pure recording....live to 2-track.....in stereo. i have a (15 ips 1/4") master dub of the Count Basie Band doing a New Years Eve party in 1961. they set up 2 mics, the band played for an hour (there are 2 reels) and there was no EQ or anything. it's magnificent.

i have many Jazz Lps (from the 50's and 60's) which are recorded and mixed mimimally where the purity and simplicity of the recording process is certainly part of the magic.

OTOH some of my most loved music (like the Beatles) is heavily layered and manipulated. so there is no right or wrong to it; it's art and sometimes the engineering and mixing is part of the art.

would i love to have the whole Beatles catalog 'live to 2-track'? sure; but it would be a different creature than what we have. the Beatles music is 'power pop' and 'pop' music is intended for 'everyman'.....so the focus of it's mix is to sound good on the lowest commom denominator gear of it's era. the artist's vision for the sound can be all over the place.