Look for the DTS upmix, sounds great, no tick and pops.
Interesting take Uranium. Nevertheless, here's what the liner notes of the re-issued mono version have to say (FWIW):
"The only real version of Sgt. Pepper is the mono version," says former Beatles sound engineer Richard Lush. "There are all sorts of things on the mono, little effects here and there, which the stereo didn't have."
Because stereo wasn't as commonplace in the 60's, the mono mixes were always given top priority. That meant in this case the mono mixing was done with much love and care, with the Beatles in attendance, whereas the stereo mixes were made in just a few hours afterwards by Producer George Martin alone. Of course, stereo was soon to take over and this meant that this original mono mix with all its subtle differences (like, for example, She's Leaving Home played at the right speed rather than slowed down as it is on the stereo) was soon deleted.
I guess the debate rages on.
The early UK pressing are the best and most expensive then the Japanese, then other European recordings and last are the US pressing. Mono is best in the same order. The Beatles records, all of them up to the White Album were recorded in mono then channeled or remixed into stereo. They were mixed to sound there best in mono because at that time young people listened to there music on mono transister radio's or on there car radio's that were mostly mono also. IMHO they sound best in mono not stereo.
Were you even alive when Sgt. Pepper's came out? You obviously don't know anything about it. The Sgt. Pepper's album was among the first to use multi-channel tape, and there was quite a bit of news about it at the time.
Uranium: In fact, Lennon's endorsement of mono version over the stereo version is widely quoted. In fact, the Wikipedia article on Sgt Pepper's -- which you seem to think is authoritative (at least when it supports your point) -- notes, as i did previsouly, that the members of the Beatles DIDN'T EVEN ATTEND THE MIXING OF THE STEREO VERSION. I'll bet that, if Lennon gave a sh*t how the stereo version sounded, he would have showed up to at the mixing, as he did for the mono version.
There's this thing called google.com where you can actually look stuff up to see if you are right before you insult people. Try it some time.
I am 51 and yes I was alive when the album came out.
The question was what is the best recording to get of SPLHCB not to insult other people about their opinions and it is the UK then Japanese mono or stereo versions IMHO. So here is my rant for you. I have both the UK original pressings in stereo & mono & reissues. The Japanese recordings in black & red vinyl also stereo & mono original & reissue. Both the US stereo & mono original & reissue. And last but not least, MFSL both regular & UHQR 2 copies of each open and sealed. Also some from other country's. Uraniumcommittee I have roughly 18 copies of SPLHCB if you want I will email pictures for you. It is one of my favorite recording along side The Dark Side of the Moon. Have you ever listened to the SOUND QUALITY of the ORIGINAL UK or Japanese mono version? They may not have all those special effect you like so much but you can here the how amazing they were at playing all their instrument that you will not here when you add the those special effects. Also the US recordings are considered the worst (bastards) of all recording by the Beatles themselves because Columbia was more interested in making a buck than the quality of a project. So if you have only listened to the USA version then you have not really listened to what it should sound like mono or stereo.
Jeffreybowman2k sorry for the ranting on your post.
hervac: no apologies necessary. your rant is infinitely more informative than uranium's intemperate remarks. i am awaiting delivery of a UK first mono pressing on the strength of earlier recommendations in this thread.
uranium: as soon as i get my crappy mono recording, maybe you would like to make an offer for my STEREO US reissue (K-Tel). For you, bidding starts at $145.
The Beatles' displeasure with Capitol Records (not Columbia) was well known. Thus, the 'butcher cover.
Capitol climbed on the Beatles bandwagon only after their initial release on Veejay Records, Capitol having initially passed them by.
My mistake. I have not played the US version in years. I'm no expert just own a lot of them trying to find the best sounding one I can.
Yes the issues between Capital and the Beatles is well documented but so is the mono & stereo issue.
And what has my age or any one else's age have to do with the version of the Beatles or any other pressings I would prefer, I just like what I like.