Sonics? All Things Must Pass -50th Anniversary


I haven’t spent much time with this release yet. I listened to it in the car on a 300 mile drive today for work. Then, and I mean right now, I’m streaming it (over pretty good gear) and I must say, I was expecting the clarity heard on the Harrison’s "Early Takes". Yet the production is on the darker side of things--in my ear.

Early Takes, sounds to my ear, like an open window into what Harrison sounded like in the studio at that time. It’s spectacular in its efficiency and cleanliness. My first impressions of the 50th ATMP is that it is clearer than the original and the Spector treatment is no longer a dominant feature. The sonics of things do not improve though. And I think they should and, more importantly, they could.

Has anyone heard Early Takes? Have you heard the new 50th Anniversary All Things Must Pass? Thoughts?

128x128jbhiller

Showing 5 responses by stuartk

"The vocals are dry, and the album sounds smaller due to an attempt at 'de-Spectorization'." 

Interesting, given that Dhani said "de-spectorization" was not his intent. 

From the Fremer review: 

"The top end is incredibly dull. There’s no sparkle or air. Horns are dull, transients are dull, there is mid-bass bloat that casts a thick warmth over everything. You have to crank it way up to restore any life whatsoever to the proceedings. And the level of compression is absurd. It’s DOA".

He asserts the above is true, across the board, no matter the format. 

Link to review:

https://www.analogplanet.com/content/all-things-must-pass-remix-quiet-beatle-gets-final-word



It's now possible to compare the 2014 remaster and the 50th anniversary on spotify. Even on my computer speakers, the differences are fairly obvious. The The 50th A. features more up-front vocals and at first, an refreshing overall  impression of clarity. I say "impression", because I became increasingly aware that drums and bass have also been accentuated which, to my ears, makes for muddy lower mids despite a relative improvement in clarity up top. This muddiness is something certain youtube reviewrers have complained about. Harrison was not that strong of a vocalist and I actually prefer the 2014 version, where his voice sits more in the mix, rather than standing out. Ironically, I found the 2014 more emotionally engaging. Of course, others will hear differerently. 
I didn't mention that, compared to Fremer I didn't hear "an incredibly dull" top-end. For one thing Harrison's slide parts sounded more  vivid and three dimensional to me. But unlike Fremer, I'm listening on cheap computer speakers when making these comparisons. 
@cd318:

RE: "very modern. . . presentation", Dhani did say something about wanting to bring the sound up to date for younger generations. . .  I guess he delivered on his promise. 

A cynical view would be that he's trying to ensure continuing sales once Boomers all die off.