Revolver 2022

[Djsedaw]

Well I still like them!

 

[sarumbear]

I don't think you need to have lived the Beatles era to understand how groundbreaking and influential their music was.

I was not commenting on your understanding. I was commenting on your feelings.

The Beatles had been loved universally by every youth of their era. If you lived in their era you are a Beatles fan. A very few objected the Beatles and liked the Stones instead but as they haven't been globally known yet that was limited to the UK. (Stones toured the US in 1964 but it was a flop and there was no chart entry. Whereas in 1964 alone the Beatles toured seven countries and played in 20 cities. By end of 1966 they played practically in every country who can manage to put on a concert, even at the Philippines!)

It was an odd feeling to like, love, the same pop group along with practically the entire youth of the globe. That has never happened since. Then again I was never a youth since

 

[sarumbear]

I finally had the chance to listen Revolver 2022 Mix on my HT in Atmos, and I must say Giles Martin did a sterling job. Perfectly natural sound, nothing like the silly up mixers that many like.

If this is what AI brings to the table for processing archive material, I’m in favour 100%.

Well done to Peter Jackson as well for sponsoring the research.

 

[Robin L]

I finally had the chance to listen Revolver 2022 Mix on my HT in Atmos, and I must say Giles Martin did a sterling job. Perfectly natural sound, nothing like the silly up mixers that many like.

If this is what AI brings to the table for processing archive material, I’m in favour 100%.

Well done to Peter Jackson as well for sponsoring the research.

"Love You To" is a track that really gets improved. All acoustic, as far as I can tell, with the possible exception of one instrument. The tone quality of these instruments is much more direct and realistic:

 

[sarumbear]

"Love You To" is a track that really gets improved. All acoustic, as far as I can tell, with the possible exception of one instrument. The tone quality of these instruments is much more direct and realistic:

There were certainly less instruments than other tracks but none of Revolver was “acoustic” I.E. played live as a whole. There were many overdubs and mix downs were done to open up more tracks.

On “Love you to” along with a Sitar, there was a tabla and a tambura, which was interleaved with the sitar, and a fuzzbox’ed electric guitar? All of those are detailed in Lewiston’s book.

The miracle is the way AI separated all instruments so well that the released mix was created in such a high quality.

 

[Robin L]

Here's a highly detailed accounting of the making of Revolver and details about Giles Martin's remix of same:

Recording and Remixing Revolver

All photos courtesy of Apple Corps Ltd. unless otherwise noted. Beatles fans gain new insights into the creation and lasting legacy of this goundbreaking album with a series of new special editions. For many Beatles fans, Revolver is their favorite album. A balance of great songwriting and first...

www.soundandvision.com

 

[mhardy6647]

Here's a highly detailed accounting of the making of Revolver and details about Giles Martin's remix of same:

Recording and Remixing Revolver

All photos courtesy of Apple Corps Ltd. unless otherwise noted. Beatles fans gain new insights into the creation and lasting legacy of this goundbreaking album with a series of new special editions. For many Beatles fans, Revolver is their favorite album. A balance of great songwriting and first...

www.soundandvision.com

when they talk about the tape speed change in Rain, do you suppose they mean 50 Hz to 42 Hz (as opposed to kHz)? If not, I'm baffled.
(I am easily baffled, though)

 

[617]

I'm not sure what the artistic value of this is; I do like this music and it's fun to listen to, but I would echo the sentiment that there isn't anything that special hiding inside these tracks, and that there is tons of music which I would rather get this restoration done to.

I listened to most of this the other day (I got a notification on my phone..) and it was fun to go back over this album. It's fun to hear the Beatles in this era where they're starting to take more risks musically and instrumentally. Unfortunately I think that the addition of demos and studio dialog kind of dilutes the real message of this music, which is embodied by what was actually released. These are not haphazard recordings - what the Beatles chose to give us in 1966 is what we should be listening to. Just my .02$

 

[Robin L]

when they talk about the tape speed change in Rain, do you suppose they mean 50 Hz to 42 Hz (as opposed to kHz)? If not, I'm baffled.
(I am easily baffled, though)

Yeah, confused me too, seems like they meant "hz".

 

[mhardy6647]

That's certainly my guess.
Actually 1966, maybe still cycles or cps.

Still, an interesting article, thanks very much for sharing it!
The pages on Paperback Writer/Rain and Klaus Voorman's cover art were particularly interesting to me.

I think I'll have to look into Voorman's book on the cover art creation.

 

[Robin L]

I'm not sure what the artistic value of this is; I do like this music and it's fun to listen to, but I would echo the sentiment that there isn't anything that special hiding inside these tracks, and that there is tons of music which I would rather get this restoration done to.

I listened to most of this the other day (I got a notification on my phone..) and it was fun to go back over this album. It's fun to hear the Beatles in this era where they're starting to take more risks musically and instrumentally. Unfortunately I think that the addition of demos and studio dialog kind of dilutes the real message of this music, which is embodied by what was actually released. These are not haphazard recordings - what the Beatles chose to give us in 1966 is what we should be listening to. Just my .02$

Like a lot of enterprises of this sort, retaining copyright is a consideration. Thus, endless takes of "Blood on the Tracks" when there's little point in rehashing indifferent repetition of performance. This is essentially the last chance to cash in on the outtakes. But I can hear the value of the remixes on artistic grounds, they are wonderfully clarifying to these ears.

 

[mhardy6647]

Like a lot of enterprises of this sort, retaining copyright is a consideration. Thus, endless takes of "Blood on the Tracks" when there's little point in rehashing indifferent repetition of performance. This is essentially the last chance to cash in on the outtakes. But I can hear the value of the remixes on artistic grounds, they are wonderfully clarifying to these ears.

The demo version of Lily, Rosemary and the Jack of Hearts was/is pretty darned great, I'd opine.

 

[Robin L]

The demo version of Lily, Rosemary and the Jack of Hearts was/is pretty darned great, I'd opine.

Good to know. I'm going by what other people wrote, noting how repetitious the "More Blood, More Tracks" collection turned out. I'm not the biggest fan of bonus tracks, save for Charlie Parker.

 

[mhardy6647]

Good to know. I'm going by what other people wrote, noting how repetitious the "More Blood, More Tracks" collection turned out. I'm not the biggest fan of bonus tracks, save for Charlie Parker.

That's where it's from all righty.
There's a local radio program (which I am, in fact, listening to as I type this) here on the "Vermont Public" media network (the erstwhile VPR) called All The Traditions, which is hosted by a fellow (Robert Resnik) who is something of a Dylan fan. I've heard it played there a few times and I think it's terrific (and I am not a huge Dylan fan, with a few notable exceptions).
That's all I can tell you.

 

[sarumbear]

when they talk about the tape speed change in Rain, do you suppose they mean 50 Hz to 42 Hz (as opposed to kHz)? If not, I'm baffled.
(I am easily baffled, though)

They meant changing tape's travel speed, which is normally 15ips (inches per second).

 

[mhardy6647]

They meant changing tape's travel speed, which is normally 15ips (inches per second).

understood. but it looks to me like the article is trying to invoke a mechanism that involves the supply frequency (50 Hz) to control a (synchronous?) motor. 50 kHz (or 42 kHz, etc.) doesn't "work", either way.
So... what do they mean?

 

[sarumbear]

understood. but it looks to me like the article is trying to invoke a mechanism that involves the supply frequency (50 Hz) to control a (synchronous?) motor. 50 kHz (or 42 kHz, etc.) doesn't "work", either way.
So... what do they mean?

I don't think the capstan speed of those recorders were fixed to the mains frequency.

 

[Joe Smith]

I'm not sure what the artistic value of this is; I do like this music and it's fun to listen to, but I would echo the sentiment that there isn't anything that special hiding inside these tracks, and that there is tons of music which I would rather get this restoration done to.

I listened to most of this the other day (I got a notification on my phone..) and it was fun to go back over this album. It's fun to hear the Beatles in this era where they're starting to take more risks musically and instrumentally. Unfortunately I think that the addition of demos and studio dialog kind of dilutes the real message of this music, which is embodied by what was actually released. These are not haphazard recordings - what the Beatles chose to give us in 1966 is what we should be listening to. Just my .02$

I like hearing the evolution of the tracks, it's been enjoyable in all of the remixes. I purchased the new vinyl for Pepper, The Beatles, Abbey Road and Let It Be...but just the single remastered album, not the super deluxe. Nice to have Spotify where we can listen once or twice to the outtakes and then move on, I don't need to own them.

It's been easy to justify the new vinyl as I only had the late 80s CD copies of those albums...I do have a fairly good vinyl copy of Revolver, I need to give that another listen and decide if I really need the new one. But I do like it. Giles does good work. I think all of the remixes have been well done. The technology side of what they've done with Revolver's 4-track production is amazing.

 

[Godataloss]

I listen to Abbey Road once every five years or so. That's enough Beatles for me.

 

[Snarfie]

Did listen an compared with the old 80ties first release CD. IMO the sound of the new re-master/remixed is more involving. Anomalies like background noise at beginning (left channel) of Taxman is gone which was distracting. Voices are more redirected to the center. The whole experience is more that instruments are placed in an expected place not extreme in the left or right channel. It's a bit more louder but a balanced laid back sound. It looks like compression is used (example Taxman here under) . Compression does not have to be bad in this case IMO it did a good job but that is quite subjective.