Comments Inspired by Beatles - LET IT BE [Blu-Ray Audio]

[key_wiz]

Also, why isn't Don't Let Me Down in 5.1??

Overall, love this set.

It’s not? A shame. (I believe my “Let It Be” is arriving tomorrow)

but after doing the right thing and giving 5.1 of Strawberry Fields Forever and Penny Lane in the Sgt Pepper set, I was very let down to not get Hey Jude, Revolution, Lady Madonna and The Inner Light in 5.1 on the White Album set. Especially since the recordings of the tracks are treated as part of the album sessions in the liner notes.

I’d settle for a 5.1 release for the “Hey Jude” album but I’m guessing that isn’t likely to happen.

 

[Mcallister]

It’s not? A shame. (I believe my “Let It Be” is arriving tomorrow)

but after doing the right thing and giving 5.1 of Strawberry Fields Forever and Penny Lane in the Sgt Pepper set, I was very let down to not get Hey Jude, Revolution, Lady Madonna and The Inner Light in 5.1 on the White Album set. Especially since the recordings of the tracks are treated as part of the album sessions in the liner notes.

I’d settle for a 5.1 release for the “Hey Jude” album but I’m guessing that isn’t likely to happen.

I was thinking about this yesterday. My hope is after adding Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane to the Pepper box they realized they Are giving away a gold mine by “giving us” the extra tracks in multichannel and remixed. So hopefully the plan is Past Masters box with everythin in MC.

 

[Ranasakawa]

I was thinking about this yesterday. My hope is after adding Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane to the Pepper box they realized they Are giving away a wold mind by “giving us” the extra tracks in multichannel and remixed. So hopefully the plan is Past Masters box with everythin in MC.

Giles Martin has quoted that he is unwilling to mix pre Pepper Beatles songs into 5.1 until the technology has improved. He discussed the difficulties used of separating the 4 track multi tapes to ensure a better surround sound mix etc....
I don't have a link but I have definitely seen some articles on the internet regarding this

 

[tezzalavell]

It’s not? A shame. (I believe my “Let It Be” is arriving tomorrow)

but after doing the right thing and giving 5.1 of Strawberry Fields Forever and Penny Lane in the Sgt Pepper set, I was very let down to not get Hey Jude, Revolution, Lady Madonna and The Inner Light in 5.1 on the White Album set. Especially since the recordings of the tracks are treated as part of the album sessions in the liner notes.

I’d settle for a 5.1 release for the “Hey Jude” album but I’m guessing that isn’t likely to happen.

Totally agree ! while I was trawling the web yesterday I came across the Hey Jude Album upmixed to 5.1 by the The Quadumvirate from Reel to Reel . The frequency analysis on adobe shows HiRez (amazing for Reel to Reel). Its rather good !!
REMOVED by MODERATOR

 

[jberq]

Giles Martin has quoted that he is unwilling to mix pre Pepper Beatles songs into 5.1 until the technology has improved. He discussed the difficulties used of separating the 4 track multi tapes to ensure a better surround sound mix etc....
I don't have a link but I have definitely seen some articles on the internet regarding this

I thought so too. Then I read the Variety interview with Mr. Martin this morning, specifically on remixing Rubber Soul and Revolver.

Giles Martin on the Beatles' 'Let It Be' -- and Deluxe Editions' Future - Variety

"One last question. There are people who insist a transformative remix couldn’t be done on the pre-4-track Beatles albums because of so many elements being blended into the two basic tracks. But of course, Beatles fans do speculate pretty much across the board: Is there an opportunity to do something with “Revolver” and “Rubber Soul,” now that you’ve gone through the Beatles’ timeline from “Sgt. Pepper” forward?

I think there is. I think we have to do it, and I’ve said this before… If you take something like “Taxman” from “Revolver” [a track often cited for its bizarre stereo separation], “Taxman” is guitar, bass and drums on one track, and vocals and a sort of shaking and guitar solo (on the right). And it sounds good; they’re amazing recordings, and amazing mixes. You know, we have to look into what technology we can do to make things de-mixed and all this kind of stuff, which I’m looking into. So I’m looking for the technology to do it with, to do something really innovative with “Rubber Soul” and “Revolver,” as opposed to just a remastering job, because it’s been remastered already. So I think we will. I think we also will look at outtakes as well.
There’s such an overwhelming desire to do something with them, by fans. And at the same time, there’s the thing in the back of your mind: There’s no point in just doing this to make money or as a sales thing, or because we’d done the others. It’s more important that we do it for the right reason. So there’s your answer: yes. If, the same as “Sgt. Pepper,” I can find a reason to do it, then yes. An actual experience reason to do it, as opposed to just because we’ve done it.

But you do think it’ll be possible to do something, sooner or later, even with the difficulty of untangling those limited tracks?

Yeah, I think we’re getting there with technology. I think we are. I’m not doing it at the moment, though, I can tell you that much. But hopefully. So, yeah — watch this space. "

 

[marcb]

I thought so too. Then I read the Variety interview with Mr. Martin this morning, specifically on remixing Rubber Soul and Revolver.

Giles Martin on the Beatles' 'Let It Be' -- and Deluxe Editions' Future - Variety

"One last question. There are people who insist a transformative remix couldn’t be done on the pre-4-track Beatles albums because of so many elements being blended into the two basic tracks. But of course, Beatles fans do speculate pretty much across the board: Is there an opportunity to do something with “Revolver” and “Rubber Soul,” now that you’ve gone through the Beatles’ timeline from “Sgt. Pepper” forward?

I think there is. I think we have to do it, and I’ve said this before… If you take something like “Taxman” from “Revolver” [a track often cited for its bizarre stereo separation], “Taxman” is guitar, bass and drums on one track, and vocals and a sort of shaking and guitar solo (on the right). And it sounds good; they’re amazing recordings, and amazing mixes. You know, we have to look into what technology we can do to make things de-mixed and all this kind of stuff, which I’m looking into. So I’m looking for the technology to do it with, to do something really innovative with “Rubber Soul” and “Revolver,” as opposed to just a remastering job, because it’s been remastered already. So I think we will. I think we also will look at outtakes as well.
There’s such an overwhelming desire to do something with them, by fans. And at the same time, there’s the thing in the back of your mind: There’s no point in just doing this to make money or as a sales thing, or because we’d done the others. It’s more important that we do it for the right reason. So there’s your answer: yes. If, the same as “Sgt. Pepper,” I can find a reason to do it, then yes. An actual experience reason to do it, as opposed to just because we’ve done it.

But you do think it’ll be possible to do something, sooner or later, even with the difficulty of untangling those limited tracks?

Yeah, I think we’re getting there with technology. I think we are. I’m not doing it at the moment, though, I can tell you that much. But hopefully. So, yeah — watch this space. "

I have no idea what Martin is talking about here. The question was about the pre-four track albums, i.e. Please Please Me and With The Beatles. But he starts talking about Taxman And Revolver And Rubber Soul...

Yes, some of the original twin tracks are gone. So making surround mixes for those 2 albums (PPM and WTB) requires technology which is arguably not there yet (definitely not, IMO).

But thankfully - in a stroke of genius by EMI - I believe they kept virtually all of the 4 track pre-bounce stems from I Want To Hold Your Hand onward - which obviously includes Taxman, Revolver, Rubber Soul, etc.

Now whether they can make good surround mixes for the pre-Pepper four track albums from those stems is a different question.

Edit: I re-read the question and now I understand why he talks about Taxman, etc. But my point remains about the stems all being available.

 

[marcb]

Just because the stems are available doesn't mean there is much he can do with them, which was his point. If many tracks are like "Taxman" with guitar bass and drums all on one track, they might as well be twin-track recordings as far as being able to mix them in surround goes. I don't blame him for wanting to wait for better technology for taking apart such tracks to exist.

Revolver wasn’t much different than Pepper (or the MMT stuff) except Pepper was more complex and they did more bounces with synced decks for Pepper. But even with more bounces on Pepper, there are still multiple instruments on many pre-bounce stems on that album - yet they didn’t need to ”de-mix” anything to create the excellent Pepper Atmos mix.

I honestly think the bigger problem with creating surround mixes for Revolver or Rubber Soul or even Help is that even though some pre-bounce stems have, say, the rhythm section on 1 track, there just isn’t that much on the other tracks to make then particularly interesting surround mixes. And they can’t measure up to amateur surround mix engineers’ expectations, so it’s kind of a lose-lose proposition.

So maybe what’s he’s saying is to even have the possibility of making it worthwhile, they’d need to be able to artificially pull apart some of those pre-bounce stems? But even then honestly there’s really not that much to work with many times.

 

[key_wiz]

Revolver wasn’t much different than Pepper (or the MMT stuff) except Pepper was more complex and they did more bounces with synced decks for Pepper. But even with more bounces on Pepper, there are still multiple instruments on many pre-bounce stems on that album - yet they didn’t need to ”de-mix” anything to create the excellent Pepper Atmos mix.

I honestly think the bigger problem with creating surround mixes for Revolver or Rubber Soul or even Help is that even though some pre-bounce stems have, say, the rhythm section on 1 track, there just isn’t that much on the other tracks to make then particularly interesting surround mixes. And they can’t measure up to amateur surround mix engineers’ expectations, so it’s kind of a lose-lose proposition.

So maybe what’s he’s saying is to even have the possibility of making it worthwhile, they’d need to be able to artificially pull apart some of those pre-bounce stems? But even then honestly there’s really not that much to work with many times.

Yes, I think that is exactly what he is saying. There's probably enough on Revolver and maybe even Rubber Soul to make a nice surround mix if you can separate out the vocals and guitars and percussion elements better.

But I don't believe that much, if any, of Revolver was recorded in the same way Pepper's was where "pre-bounce stems" exist on another reel of tape. They didn't use two machines on Revolver the way they did on Pepper's. At most they would take 3 tracks, mix those down to the 4th track, and then erase over those first 3 tracks for overdubs. Which is why they often ended up with so much already mixed down to the one track.

 

[marcb]

Yes, I think that is exactly what he is saying. There's probably enough on Revolver and maybe even Rubber Soul to make a nice surround mix if you can separate out the vocals and guitars and percussion elements better.

But I don't believe that much, if any, of Revolver was recorded in the same way Pepper's was where "pre-bounce stems" exist on another reel of tape. They didn't use two machines on Revolver the way they did on Pepper's. At most they would take 3 tracks, mix those down to the 4th track, and then erase over those first 3 tracks for overdubs. Which is why they often ended up with so much already mixed down to the one track.

Again, there is little difference between Pepper and Revolver except fewer stems. They both have similar co-mingled pre-bounce stems - except Revolver was limited to one generation of bounces and thus fewer elements to work with.

Of course, if combined elements could be isolated transparently, that would give the mixer more to work with. But that’s true with even with some Abbey Road stuff. The bigger problem IMO with earlier albums is more the lack of elements regardless, not the isolation (or lack thereof) of them.

Taxman is just the worst example because the entire rhythm section is entirely on one stem - and the other 4 pre-bounce stems mostly consist of some guitar, vocals and the “Mr. Wilson, Mr. Heath“ bit. But even if you isolate the bass, drums & rhythm guitar, you still don’t have much to work with.

 

[LuvMyQuad]

Come on guys... its a poll thread...

 

[Ephi82]

Just because the stems are available doesn't mean there is much he can do with them, which was his point. If many tracks are like "Taxman" with guitar bass and drums all on one track, they might as well be twin-track recordings as far as being able to mix them in surround goes. I don't blame him for wanting to wait for better technology for taking apart such tracks to exist.

this. Pre Pepper they bounced exclusively on one 4 trak machine, bouncing three tracks to one and then overdubbing parts to the now opened traks. The original instrument stems were overwritten by the overdubs, lost forever. With Pepper they used two 4 trak machines, loaded up content on all four tracks on one machine and then sending a mono or stereo mix to a second machine, where overdubs took place. The tape with the first four tracks WAS saved by EMI, and that’s what enabled the recent remix

 

[key_wiz]

Again, there is little difference between Pepper and Revolver except fewer stems. They both have similar co-mingled pre-bounce stems - except Revolver was limited to one generation of bounces and thus fewer elements to work with.

Of course, if combined elements could be isolated transparently, that would give the mixer more to work with. But that’s true with even with some Abbey Road stuff. The bigger problem IMO with earlier albums is more the lack of elements regardless, not the isolation (or lack thereof) of them.

Taxman is just the worst example because the entire rhythm section is entirely on one stem - and the other 4 pre-bounce stems mostly consist of some guitar, vocals and the “Mr. Wilson, Mr. Heath“ bit. But even if you isolate the bass, drums & rhythm guitar, you still don’t have much to work with.

It depends upon the song. Some, like Taxman, they did on one four track machine, recording three tracks, bouncing those down to the fourth, and then leaving 3 others for vocals, guitar solo and anything else. So yes, very little anyone can do with that track.

Some others -- Here There and Everywhere, Got To Get You Into My Life, Eleanor Rigby for example -- used the two-deck method so presumably, as with Pepper's, those pre-bounced 4 tracks tapes still exist.

What they were ALSO able to do with these MC remixes is some of the elements can be extracted digitally that were recorded on the same track. For example, guitar, keyboard or percussion overdubs that might have punched-into a empty space on a lead vocal track or guitar solo track. And the technology exists to somewhat 'extract' certain elements that, while you maybe can't isolate it completely, you can put it on it's own digital track and use that make it seem more isolated in the surround field.

I think Revolver is as far back as they could go and -- even with better technology -- create a surround mix of any real substance. As you said, on the earlier stuff, there simply aren't enough elements.

 

[MidiMagic]

It depends on HOW they used the tracks they had. Several methods were used:

Multiple simultaneous mics mixed to one 2-track recorder:
- This depends on how they mixed the mics together. If any kind of panning is used, tech like Involve could separate them.

Bounce and add back and forth on one 2-track:
- Only the last track contains different material. Everything else is on the other track.

Copy and add between two 2-tracks:
- Add new parts properly panned each time.
- A stereo mix is preserved copy to copy as more parts are added.

Single 4-track bounce sequence:
- Record 3 tracks.
- Mix and bounce them to the 4th track.
- Record 2 tracks.
- Mix and bounce them to the 3rd track.
- Record 2 tracks.
- Mix down.
- Track 4 has 3 parts, track 3 has 2, and tracks 1 and 2 have 1 part each.

Single 4-track bounce and add sequence:
- Record 3 tracks.
- Mix and bounce them to the 4th track, adding another part (on the fly).
- Record 2 tracks.
- Mix and bounce them to the 3rd track, adding another part.
- Record 1 track.
- Bounce it to the 2nd track, adding another part.
- Record 1 track.
- Mix down.
- Track 4 has 4 parts, track 3 has 3, track 2 has 2 parts, and track 1 has 1 part.

Bounce and add tracks back and forth on one 4-track:
- Record tracks 1, 2, and 3.
- Mix and bounce 1, 2, and 3 to track 4.
- Record tracks 2 and 3.
- Mix and bounce 2, 3, and 4 to track 1.
- Keep recording more tracks on 2 and 3 and bouncing to track 4, and then to track 1
- Mix down.
- Only the last 3 tracks contain different material. Everything else is on one track.

Single 4-track stereo bounce and add sequence:
- Record a stereo pair of tracks on tracks 1 and 2.
- Copy tracks 1 and 2 to tracks 3 and 4, mixing in another stereo pair on the fly.
- Copy tracks 3 and 4 to tracks 1 and 2, mixing in another stereo pair on the fly.
- Repeat the last two steps, building up the stereo mix.
- Record two more tracks on the two tracks copied from on the last step.
- Mix down.

Copy and add tracks between two 4-tracks:
- Record 4 tracks.
- Mix down to tracks 1 and 2 on the other 4-track.*
- Trade the two 4-tracks.
- Add tracks on 3 and 4.
- Repeat the last 3 steps, building up the stereo mix.
- Mix down.

* Can put a new blank reel on the recording 4-track here.

Record more than 4 parts on a 4-track for a stereo or matrix quad mix.
- Record tracks 1 and 2 as a stereo or an encoded quad mix.
- Record tracks 3 and 4 as a stereo or encoded quad mix while listening to 1 and 2.*
- Mix down. The pannings on each encoded pair give wiggle room in the mix to adjust the mixdown.

* I often recorded all 4 tracks simultaneously for live events, with vocals on one pair and instruments on the other.

 

[ar surround]

It depends upon the song. Some, like Taxman, they did on one four track machine, recording three tracks, bouncing those down to the fourth, and then leaving 3 others for vocals, guitar solo and anything else. So yes, very little anyone can do with that track.

Some others -- Here There and Everywhere, Got To Get You Into My Life, Eleanor Rigby for example -- used the two-deck method so presumably, as with Pepper's, those pre-bounced 4 tracks tapes still exist.

What they were ALSO able to do with these MC remixes is some of the elements can be extracted digitally that were recorded on the same track. For example, guitar, keyboard or percussion overdubs that might have punched-into a empty space on a lead vocal track or guitar solo track. And the technology exists to somewhat 'extract' certain elements that, while you maybe can't isolate it completely, you can put it on it's own digital track and use that make it seem more isolated in the surround field.

I think Revolver is as far back as they could go and -- even with better technology -- create a surround mix of any real substance. As you said, on the earlier stuff, there simply aren't enough elements.

Taxman is an awful stereo mix. I wish someone would take a shot at improving it using one of those DES programs. There are a number of tracks on Eric Records releases that have been converted from mono to stereo using DES methods that sound great. (And don't use those crappy Youtube videos as a reference because they sound like shit in comparison.)

 

[marcb]

Taxman is an awful stereo mix. I wish someone would take a shot at improving it using one of those DES programs. There are a number of tracks on Eric Records releases that have been converted from mono to stereo using DES methods that sound great. (And don't use those crappy Youtube videos as a reference because they sound like shit in comparison.)

I’ve got a few of the CDs. They’re interesting - and certainly miles ahead of old fake stereo - but they’re still fake sounding to me.

My guess is if they tried to make a DES stereo mix from the true mono mix of a recording which also an existing decent true stereo mix, it wouldn’t measure up.

Taxman is what it is. Personally, I don’t see the point of a boring post-60s cookie-cutter bass/drums/vocals center stereo mix for it.

 

[marcb]

It depends on HOW they used the tracks they had. Several methods were used:

Multiple simultaneous mics mixed to one 2-track recorder:
- This depends on how they mixed the mics together. If any kind of panning is used, tech like Involve could separate them.

Bounce and add back and forth on one 2-track:
- Only the last track contains different material. Everything else is on the other track.

Copy and add between two 2-tracks:
- Add new parts properly panned each time.
- A stereo mix is preserved copy to copy as more parts are added.

Single 4-track bounce sequence:
- Record 3 tracks.
- Mix and bounce them to the 4th track.
- Record 2 tracks.
- Mix and bounce them to the 3rd track.
- Record 2 tracks.
- Mix down.
- Track 4 has 3 parts, track 3 has 2, and tracks 1 and 2 have 1 part each.

Single 4-track bounce and add sequence:
- Record 3 tracks.
- Mix and bounce them to the 4th track, adding another part (on the fly).
- Record 2 tracks.
- Mix and bounce them to the 3rd track, adding another part.
- Record 1 track.
- Bounce it to the 2nd track, adding another part.
- Record 1 track.
- Mix down.
- Track 4 has 4 parts, track 3 has 3, track 2 has 2 parts, and track 1 has 1 part.

Bounce and add tracks back and forth on one 4-track:
- Record tracks 1, 2, and 3.
- Mix and bounce 1, 2, and 3 to track 4.
- Record tracks 2 and 3.
- Mix and bounce 2, 3, and 4 to track 1.
- Keep recording more tracks on 2 and 3 and bouncing to track 4, and then to track 1
- Mix down.
- Only the last 3 tracks contain different material. Everything else is on one track.

Single 4-track stereo bounce and add sequence:
- Record a stereo pair of tracks on tracks 1 and 2.
- Copy tracks 1 and 2 to tracks 3 and 4, mixing in another stereo pair on the fly.
- Copy tracks 3 and 4 to tracks 1 and 2, mixing in another stereo pair on the fly.
- Repeat the last two steps, building up the stereo mix.
- Record two more tracks on the two tracks copied from on the last step.
- Mix down.

Copy and add tracks between two 4-tracks:
- Record 4 tracks.
- Mix down to tracks 1 and 2 on the other 4-track.*
- Trade the two 4-tracks.
- Add tracks on 3 and 4.
- Repeat the last 3 steps, building up the stereo mix.
- Mix down.

* Can put a new blank reel on the recording 4-track here.

Record more than 4 parts on a 4-track for a stereo or matrix quad mix.
- Record tracks 1 and 2 as a stereo or an encoded quad mix.
- Record tracks 3 and 4 as a stereo or encoded quad mix while listening to 1 and 2.*
- Mix down. The pannings on each encoded pair give wiggle room in the mix to adjust the mixdown.

* I often recorded all 4 tracks simultaneously for live events, with vocals on one pair and instruments on the other.

That’s great, but “what” depends upon how they used tracks they had?

My attention span is too short to read through these in detail, but at a glance I’d say at least several (and probably more) were NOT employed by George Martin on Revolver or any . Two-track? 2-track panning seperated by Involve? Quad mix? What do those have to with Revolver?

I think the most stems for Revolver is 7 or 8. Taxman has 5, I think. Again, I just think there often isn’t that much to work with - and even if the technology was good enough to separate things, the results would still be underwhelming compared to the peanut gallery’s delusions of grandeur. Lose-lose.

 

[ar surround]

That’s great, but “what” depends upon how they used tracks they had?

My attention span is too short to read through these in detail, but at a glance I’d say at least several (and probably more) were NOT employed by George Martin on Revolver or any . Two-track? 2-track panning seperated by Involve? Quad mix? What do those have to with Revolver?

I think the most stems for Revolver is 7 or 8. Taxman has 5, I think. Again, I just think there often isn’t that much to work with - and even if the technology was good enough to separate things, the results would still be underwhelming compared to the peanut gallery’s delusions of grandeur. Lose-lose.

Since everyone dislikes the taxman, perhaps they could remix Revolver into surround without the cut Taxman. You all remember how Steven Wilson cut certain things out of the first ELP album because they didn't have the multitracks.

 

[MidiMagic]

My attention span is too short to read through these in detail, but at a glance I’d say at least several (and probably more) were NOT employed by George Martin on Revolver or any . Two-track? 2-track panning seperated by Involve? Quad mix? What do those have to with Revolver?

I was going through the various possible uses of 2- and 4-track tape machines.

Many classical recordings I have on records went through the mixing console BEFORE they went to tape. All of the panning was already in place before the tape was recorded. Involve could be used to separate parts on such a recording because they have different pannings.

 

[ar surround]

I’ve got a few of the CDs. They’re interesting - and certainly miles ahead of old fake stereo - but they’re still fake sounding to me.

My guess is if they tried to make a DES stereo mix from the true mono mix of a recording which also an existing decent true stereo mix, it wouldn’t measure up.

Taxman is what it is. Personally, I don’t see the point of a boring post-60s cookie-cutter bass/drums/vocals center stereo mix for it.

The Eric Records DES tracks are of variable results and quality.

 

[key_wiz]

The Eric Records DES tracks are of variable results and quality.

Some are very good. Some hurt my ears.