Beatles Mono Box - Grail Or Overhyped? Part 1 Revolver vs. Iconic 1st UK Pressing
Vložit
- čas přidán 29. 08. 2024
- Matrix: XEX 606-1
Article: paulmossbassblo...
Revolver is the seventh studio album by the English rock band the Beatles. It was released on 5 August 1966, accompanied by the double A-side single "Eleanor Rigby" / "Yellow Submarine". The album was the Beatles' final recording project before their retirement as live performers and marked the group's most overt use of studio technology to date, building on the advances of their late 1965 release Rubber Soul. It has since become regarded as one of the greatest and most innovative albums in the history of popular music, with recognition centred on its range of musical styles, diverse sounds, and lyrical content.
The Beatles recorded Revolver after taking a three-month break at the start of 1966, and during a period when London was feted as the era's cultural capital. Regarded by some commentators as the start of the group's psychedelic period, the songs reflect their interest in the drug LSD, Eastern philosophy and the avant-garde while addressing themes such as death and transcendence from material concerns. With no plans to reproduce their new material in concert, the band made liberal use of automatic double tracking, varispeed, reversed tapes, close audio miking, and instruments outside of their standard live set-up. Among its tracks are "Tomorrow Never Knows", incorporating heavy Indian drone and a collage of tape loops; "Eleanor Rigby", a song about loneliness featuring a string octet as its only musical backing; and "Love You To", a foray into Hindustani classical music. The sessions also produced a non-album single, "Paperback Writer" backed with "Rain".
In the United Kingdom, the album's 14 tracks were gradually distributed to radio stations in the weeks before its release. In North America, Revolver was reduced to 11 songs by Capitol Records, with the omitted three appearing on the June 1966 LP Yesterday and Today. The release there coincided with the Beatles' final concert tour and the controversy surrounding John Lennon's remark that the band had become "more popular than Jesus". The album topped the Record Retailer chart in the UK for seven weeks and the US Billboard Top LPs list for six weeks. Critical reaction was highly favourable in the UK but less so in the US amid the press's unease at the band's outspokenness on contemporary issues.
Revolver expanded the boundaries of pop music, revolutionised standard practices in studio recording, advanced principles espoused by the 1960s counterculture, and inspired the development of psychedelic rock, electronica, progressive rock and world music. The album cover, designed by Klaus Voormann, combined Aubrey Beardsley-inspired line drawing with photo collage and won the 1967 Grammy Award for Best Album Cover, Graphic Arts. Aided by the 1987 international CD release, which standardised its content to the original Parlophone version, Revolver has surpassed Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band in many critics' estimation as the Beatles' best album. It was ranked first in the 1998 and 2000 editions of Colin Larkin's book All Time Top 1000 Albums and third in the 2003 and 2012 editions of Rolling Stone magazine's list of the "500 Greatest Albums of All Time". It has been certified double platinum by the BPI and 5× platinum by the RIAA.
vinyl community vinyl collection record collection 45 rpm record collecting
Michael, The yellow and black Parlophone records from 1963-68 were cut with an all-tube (valve) system for a unique and "different" sound, even the later Stereo Blue box set (HTM cuts) used this signal chain. The 2014 box set were cut using a completely different signal chain (no tubes) so there's no way they could sound the same.
A lot of what you're hearing is the difference between a tube cut system and a solid state cut system, of course the aging master tapes may have suffered degradation too.
That might ver well be one of the reasons 67Pepper
I have a mint German 70's pressing -2/-2 stereo and it is completely different from the my 2009 LP version. The first time I listened to Tomorrow Never Knows on the German Pressing I was blown away, I love having the different versions to appreciate the differences and enjoy them all.
I asked my dad few years ago about the mono vs the stereo. He told me that as youngsters they had only one speaker and the radio transistors, which were like the iPod of the time, were monophonic. So, the Beatles’ fun base was “monophonic”. He said that the stereo was for old people
Something to consider about the mono box at the time it was released - the popularity of vinyl was quickly rising and the mono box was an affordable way to get clean pressings of the whole mono catalog in AAA in one action. Sure, OG mono prices were also going up in price but the packaging, the quality, the convenience and the price made the mono box an easy choice. It was not expensive when I pre-ordered it. (Looking at my old email, I paid $284 after tax and shipping!!) You can always make the argument that something can be better ... but the mono box, for most of us, was good enough. Maybe Revolver sounds better from a 1st press but my box version of Sgt Pepper definitely sounds better than my mono UK 1st.
I have seen copies of Revolver -1, -1 UK mono Parlophone in VG+/NM condition sell for more than the price of the entire Beatles mono box. It was always highly sought after among collectors.
Michael - I have the Mono box and a early first press mono Revolver (not the 606-1 mix that you have) but it still beats the Mono box pressing (on my system) in overall sound quality. No mistake the Mono box is great. I bought the Mono box because acquiring clean pressings was getting difficult and expensive. The Mono box, when released was a great way to get good sounding, clean copies at a relatively reasonable price. Unfortunately, if you didn't purchase when it was released, today you have to pay a premium. Love your channel.
Makes me want to get my ‘78 version out and have a listen. It’s been years 👍😎
This is my favorite Beatles album and I heard for years that the mono version was the one to get, in part because the Beatles themselves were mainly concerned with it, while the stereo version was basically a novelty item. When these 2009 mono reissues came out I didn't buy the Box, but instead bought a few of them individually, including Revolver. I enjoy it to this day, but I've always been underwhelmed by the sound, especially after hearing about how great the mono is supposed to be, and how these reissues were all-analog (unlike most other newer Beatles reissues). Now I would really like to hear this comparison for myself. Thanks a lot!
Michael I really appreciate your observations.The Blue Train stereo is exactly as you stated! The Beatles pressings have so many versions.... I have the Beatles Blue Box stereo from 1978,FANTASTIC! Japanese red vinyl monos ,diffierent. Some very early UK pressings including the Horzu issue also very enlightening. The mono box is still fantastic if you purchased it when it was released.All in all The Beatles will be forever! Cheers,Chet
Interesting video, as always. In 1972 I heard Beatles UK mono first pressings via a co-worker who was stationed in England from 1962-1967. He was always an audiophile so he always tried to get the albums upon release. He let me come over to his house to hear these LPs. He also let me make my own 7 1/2 copies open reel copies. The Capitol stereo pressings in America were total crap. When I heard these mono UK pressings I was totally blown away. I went out and picked up some early 70's Parlaphone mono pressings and while they were far better than the Capitol pressings, they actually were not as good as the first pressings I had on open reel tape.
Fast forward to 2017 I bought a turntable and and a whole new system and returned to playing vinyl for the first time in 30 years. To commemorate this momentous occasion I also got the Beatles in Mono. The first LP I played on my new system and turntable was Please, Please Me from the Mono Box. I was stunned at how good this LP sounded. I had forgotten how good LPs could sound. It was certainly better than my early 70's UK Mono pressings which I "dusted off" and played to compare it with the Mono Box. It was way better than any of the 3 different CDs I had of this album. But I just had a feeling that the open reel tape I used to have of the UK first pressings sounded better. There wasn't quite as much detail and openness to the sound.
Unfortunately I no longer had the tape to compare it to. Listening to the other LPs in the Mono Box I had the same impressions about those LPs vs. the tape. Now granted I have a good "audio memory" but I can't trust it after 15 years. This is the last time I played the tapes. The other comment I will make is, my new system is way, way better than what I had when I heard that tape. So I found it interesting that I had this vague feeling the Mono Box was not as good as the OP. Even on my system from 15 years ago. That is why I found your video today very interesting. Your saying the Revolver OP UK LP was noticeably far better than the Mono Box, confirms my feelings back in 2017 when I first heard the Mono Box. I have a very strong feeling that you will find the other UK OPs noticeably better too. I can just say I feel the Mono Box is probably the best repressing/remaster I can easily get. It will be very interesting to see what the October release of Revolver brings.
As always thank you for what you do.
Great explanation about Night & Day difference! I’ve noticed similar well kept or sealed OG pressings have a dynamic that really makes you wonder what happened in between? So many generations, remastering, remixing away from mint OG. Almost as if a needledrop would’ve been a better source for the reissue?
This has been my experience. I own the famed mono box and almost invariably find that originals sound better, even in less than stellar condition. It makes you wonder if they even bothered to compare what they were doing with original pressings. They say a lot of effort was expended on the new vinyl, but to what end?
Amazing video Michael. I sense your excitement and delight. I feel like jumping on a plane to Germany just to hear it 😂
Hey Michael - appreciate your videos!
My two cents - I wish I had caught this Beatles in Mono box set when it came out. Currently, I’m glad Giles Martin is at the helm of the newest mixes from the last few years, and of course the Beatles has an enormous appeal, including today. That being said,…
It would be so great for a plain old Mono analog LP at a good price. The brand new Revolver box is exciting to an extent but I just want to be able to purchase Rubber Soul, Revolver, etc on a mono & analog single LP version and they are releasing everything EXCEPT that.
Cheers everybody!
Originals always win. Something to be said for fresh tapes when they were made. Makes all the difference.
This box is as good as it gets Michael. I have original UKs and Japanese red wax monos. Is the box perfect? No. Is it fantastic? Yes. I would buy this box again if it was available again tomorrow.
Careful Michael, there shouldnt be THAT much difference from what I know. Maybe the -1 mix really changes a lot but tons of people prefer the 2014 reissues so balance that volume carefully because the main difference is that OGs are much louder.
It’s astonishing the greatness of parlophone pressings or Horzu pressing of Magical Mystery Tour. As celebrated as reissue of On The Beach was, I couldn’t believe how much better the Neil Young original was/is.
Excellent video Michael. I have my copy of XEX 606-1 of Revolver as well as the second press 606-2 and both of them sound incredible. I have all first pressings of mono UK Beatles albums and they are in excellent condition and as far as I am concerned, the best sounding versions of Bealtes albums anywhere and in any format. I was going to buy the remastered mono box, but when I saw how outrageous the cost was, I decided to go with the originals and I am so glad I did.
Just a comment at the special "Tomorrow Never Knows" mix, which is on the very first pressing that 45 RPM Audiophile talks about: This version is the so called "Tomorrow Never Knows (Mono Mix RM 11)" and will be included in the new Revolver Super Deluxe Edition which will be released next month.
thx for sharing this Kiel!!
@@Michael45RPM BTW: Very interesting what you experienced while your comparison of both mono records. I never got a clean early mono pressing of "Revolver" so I never compared that album to the 2014 edition (but others). It seams that you spured me on looking for an early "Revolver" mono pressing... 😅
Sir, thank you for including the wax info, so critical nowadays with the flood of sellers trying to capitalize on the resurgence of buyers of vinyl; many of them are finding out what they paid for is not the correct pressing …another valuable tool for buyer beware !!👏
Great review. Regarding Mono, the cheapest format at the time was radio, in mono, putting a stereo record on was a shock. So have always stuck to the mono.
Hi Michael, great video. I had a similar experience when I first got the mono box. I have all the original Beatles monos, and stereos for that matter. So, like you, I compared one of the LPs. A Hard Day’s Night I seem to recall. Anyway my original sounded better: more drive, more immediacy. So after a year or two I sold my mono box. I did make a small profit, but more fool me, if I’d kept it another few years I’d have made a small fortune!
To be honest I’ve been buying LPs for decades and rarely bother with reissues. My ongoing quest is for the earliest and best condition original.
Btw. If playing original monos, up to around mid sixties a proper mono cartridge makes a huge improvement. But you absolutely must not play a stereo record on a proper mono cartridge.
As someone who only recently started buying LPs again after 35 years, I have to say I have been less than impressed with the reviews of a number of these repressings., as well as a few I've purchased. I'm starting to think buying used original pressings are the way I want to go for most of my purchases.
Some reissues are worth it especially when availability and cost come into play; but generally, original is what I seek.
What reviews?
First of all I think the question if the Mono Box is worth the money is totally different today compared to when it was released. I paid 330€ for it (at JPC) - it's easily worth that! ;)
Regarding Revolver: I always thought Revolver is the weakest sounding mono album from the Beatles overall. It's said that they wanted it to sound not so fresh but a little dull. And when I listened to all the albums in the box for the first time I thought Revolver was the only one not sounding so good so I bought an early pressing - mine is xex 605-2 and 606-2. When I compare it to the one in the boxset it is a little better but not by much.
Also what you said in the video: You hope they take an original and make the new pressing sound as close to that as possible - they already did that in 2014. For all the albums they took the original tapes and made a high-res digital copy so they don't have to play the tape that often. Then they took the original cutting notes from the 60s and listened to the original pressings and found the EQ settings to make it sound as close to that as possible. Then they went back to the orignal tapes and cut the lacquers directly from them with the settings they found with the help of the digital copies. So I doubt there will be a significant difference between the 2014 and 2022 mono pressing...
Regarding the playback of mono records on stereo equipment: During the 60s the grooves on mono records got smaller and smaller. But it's still better to play 60s vinyl with a (bigger) mono pick-up. But playing it with a stereo pick-up shouldn't make that much of a difference - that's more critical with records from the 50s. The most important thing for playing mono records from any year on stereo equipment is the use of a mono switch! That reduces the surface noise immensely and can sometimes even make G+ vinyl sound good!
Hi Michael - I really enjoy your videos. The presentations are well thoughtout without being scripted. The enthusiasm you have for collecting vinyl and music in general comes through. I also appreciate the fact that you do not use foul language. Not judging but don't think it is necessary. By the way I ordered Blue Train (mono) after I saw your video. It arrives tomorrow. The stero version is next. Ciao.
The only OG UK mono pressing I bought when I got back into records in 2012 was Rubber Soul. Then the mono box came out and I bought that saying "it's the last Beatles item I'll ever buy" (wrong). I compared my OG Rubber Soul to the 2014 and thought they sounded nearly identical. Of course the OG has some surface noise and the cover has a more "authentic" feel. I think the Mono set is a must have for any Beatles fanatic. That said, if I didn't buy it in 2014 I wouldn't shell out what people want for it now. Hopefully they'll press it again in another year or 2. They definitely know there's a market for it. I'd likely shell out $400 for an all analog new Stereo Box Set even though I have AAA cuts of my favorite later Beatles albums (70s Japanese pressings are awesome and not ridiculously priced). Thanks for making me want another $400 Discogs record. I'm curious what you had to pay for it...
Jason / Michael: Somewhat related, you or anyone in these comments know if there are any Mono CD BOX SETs still for sale on a few retail sites? In other words, there are lots of knockoffs we know but I'm not sure if the CD mono box set version of the vinyl mono box set is available for sale?
Thanks in advance!
@@DanielHog13 The CD mono set is not the same version as the vinyl box set. The CD box came out in 2009 and used digital safety masters as the source, the vinyl came out in 2014 and used the original master tapes as the source. You won't find the CD mono box at retail. On eBay they go for between $200 to $400, but you never know if you're getting a real set. If you find it for under $200 it will either be in not so great condition, missing something, or fake.
@@michaelharrington75 Thanks Michael. Definitely aware of two(?) different release yrs for the CD Mono box and vinyl Mono box as you stated. Wasn't sure if the CD Mono box was reissued twice. Have been looking at the handful and varying CD Box In Mono sets for a month on Discogs and Ebay, including CZcams "how to spot fraudulent CD Box sets" tips, etc. So I'm treading lightly with, what actually constitutes an authentic In Mono CD Box set. In other words, was there a "Worldwide" set or "Japanese" set and a "US" set only? ....using Discogs cautiously to read the diffs.
🤪
@@DanielHog13 I believe Japan did have their own version of the CD mono box? I think I've seen it on ebay before, and the seller was wanting like $600 for it!
Hi Michael, hope not to disappoint you or your readers but the new mono, although promising for the AAA procedure, has been recorded using the ‘settings’ (EQ and what not) of the mono box copy. It’ll sound differently from that one but also from the OG. Going the OG route is still your best option. Keep ‘em coming and comparing, we’re all here for learning and appreciating. ✌️
i think you are right thats what will happen MusClas
First off, thank you for your videos! I always look forward to watching them. I have a NM UK mono Revolver with the 606-1 matrix on side 2 and also a UK 1968 mono copy with the 606-2 matrix on side 2 and they both sound better to me than the 2014 vinyl. For this comparison, the midrange and treble are must more present on the UK early pressings. My gear is rather modest compared to your equipment, Technics SL1200 G with 2M MONO SE going thru a Project Phonobox RS2.
I’m tempted by the new re-master of Revolver. Never owned it! Always stuck to the two compilation (red and blue) albums. This video has inspired me. Thank you.
Another great video Michael, thank you. Fantastic.
II very often find that new, warm, polished, "remasters" sound a bit boring. Make no mistake, I am very glad that these remasters exist at all, but I would like a little more freshness and energy.
Thanks for doing this video (I didn't realize these pressings were going for so much money, nor was I aware of how different Revolver sounds.) You point out something crucial -- different mastering jobs make a very real difference, and re-masters aren't necessarily better (a HUGE percentage of the time, they're not). I got the Rubber Soul and Sgt Pepper's in Mono lps a few years ago when they were new and affordable. I'm too lazy to re-compare, but I remember comparing to original pressings when I first got them and thinking they added more bass than before, but it wasn't awful, and the pressings were quieter at least. Seemed like an overall a decent mastering job, although not exactly like the original -- even though they claimed they used the original mastering notes for this remaster.
With that in mind, a 2dB boost of 10k on a custom EMI tube EQ from the 1960s is not at all the same as a 2dB boost of 10k from a completely different solid state mastering EQ; Unless you use the exact same gear with everything calibrated the same and then set exactly the same way it had been, you'll never get it sounding exactly the same. I don't believe they did these Beatles in Mono remasters with the exact same mastering chains as the originals, even if they went by the old notes. With all these remasters, they'll often say they referenced the original but they never sound all that similar.
I think the biggest difference between og pressings and these new pressings is that modern engineers are afraid to leave any rough edges. They try to push the sound into a tight little box and make everything smooth sounding. So guitars don’t leap out so high notes don’t crash into your ears. I imagine they sit with headphones on and make sure you can hear everything but in doing that they overly level the playing field.
I think in the old days mastering from the tape meant making a record that sounds like the tape. Now they make the records to sound even and smooth at the expense of what the original producer and the band handed in. Kinda of like the band hands in this fresh live sounding recording and mastering engineers take that smooth it out and make it sound like a modern recording. Gutting the rough edges and sandpapering out all the little high and lows.
I know im not explaining this right but i hope you get what im trying to say.
I think Michael no matter how many times you do this you will always find the same results. Og will always win because what mattered at the time of the recording to the bands and the original producers will always be better than a engineer working on a old tape trying to make it better.
Which is my I so despise the horrible Giles remixes. To me they are the ultimate insult. Both to the band and his dad.
In terms of so few original stereo issues bear in mind that at the time stereo phonographs were still reasonably rare, very expensive and pretty much the province of "serious" (and wealthy!) music fans. The average Beatles buyer was much more likely to be playing his purchases on a mono Dansette portable or similar which would have a mono (and by definition stereo disc incompatible) cartridge / stylus so they couldn't play the stereo version even if the wanted to.
Graham from the UK here, loving your youtube content by the way. My understanding is that the Beatles Mono recordings are more desirable because the Beatles themselves were involved in the mono mixing, taking days to perfect , and at conception they were never intended to be stereo. Stereo mixing was done by George Martin afterwards and done in a couple of hours and not done by the beatles themselves. So the monos are considered closer to how the beatles wanted you to hear their sound.
Here is why I think they sound different.
Tube vs. solid-state cutting and different mastering choices.
BS. The reason is simple: tapes age!!
@@vincentwerner4856 BS . Some of the best pressings, but not all the best pressings, were cut by Harry Moss in the ’70s, on much better transistor mastering equipment than they had in the ’60s, and that is part of the reason why some of them sound so much better than most of the earlier pressings. (The same thing happened at Columbia for Kind of Blue and a small number of other albums.)
But plenty of what Moss cut does not sound good, so searching out his versions may be helpful but not as helpful as most people think.
It’s what scientists and historians refer to as “the illusion of knowledge.” It prevents you from understanding what is really going on with records.
This accounts for virtually every internet thread and every comments section that audiophiles can be found on. These are people who think they know a lot more than they do, and therefore have no need to find out more, because they already know it.
Imo, it’s mastering chain
Phenomenal 30 000 followers. 🍀
You more than deserve it.
My sympathy and happiness for you and your channel.
Congratulation.
❤️Heike
I’ve got the 1973 EMI boxed Logo version. Best pressing I’ve ever heard.Leaps out of the speakers.
That would be the stereo version? No Mono presses after 69 unless you mean the 1982 mono reissues (but they replicated the yellow/black labels).
@@classicrock7890 probably mate!,I don’t even look at stuff like that! I just mentioned that the emi box version sounds amazing! It could have two gills & a trunk for all I care!
I have an original UK mono XEX-616 pressing of "Revolver" with mix 13 of "Tomorrow Never Knows" it sounds comparable to the 2014 one, IMHO. Certainly sounds better than my first US copy I bought in, I think, in 1970.
I wonder what you would think about a US mono OG. People say the US pressings are inferior to UK but I always enjoy them as I grew up with the different track listings.
Thanks for this Michael! Actually Sean Magee cuts his records somewhat low and I believe Revolver and Beatles For Sale were the worst in the box. Even so, my preferred version is the 1982/6 Japan Mono AAA reissue (although I only had the stereo UK to compare and seemed a bit muddy).
I have a -2/-1 OG Mono pressing, as well as I once had a -2/-2 and a -2/-3 cutting with Times New Roman font on the label. All of them sounded very harsh and rough, in my opinion. The 2014 mono reissue is better in terms of clarity, and quality of vinyl IMO.
To be fair, none of them are sonic masterpieces. Every version of revolver I’ve heard sounds like crap compared to everything else they’ve done.
However, the comparisons aren’t done yet! Can’t wait to get my hands on the new AAA cut from the 50th anniversary box
I didn't buy into any of the boxes or new pressings ..I just know from experience with individual picks that they will not sound as good ..its nice to see you discovering the original pressings ..that Revolver is a grail pressing ..I purchased new pressings and was very unmoved by them ..some of the 70s and 80s pressings are better
Can’t wait for future comparisons! Very interesting
Michael revolver is the only LP I do not have for when it came out back in the 60s I have all the capital stuff the Apple stuff up to 71 but revolver eluded me back then but I do have all the monos original capital pressings here in the USA and guess what they still sound great how old are they again over 50 years old
Miss your video's my friend. This is the longest sabadical in a while. Look forward to the next one!
Hearing an original first-press recording of the Beatles is like seeing a freshly painted Picasso painting. Fifty years later it will never be the same.
My Aunt left me her French Odeon, Offset Reissue copy of “Revolver” and I’ve compared it to my friend’s 80’ - more recent reissued copies and we all prefer the sound quality and dynamics of my 1978 pressing.
The mono’s were probably mostly played on box record players. While the stereo’s were on a turntable.
Hi Mike, Have you listened to the Mobile Fidelity version of Revolver? This was pressed inn Japan back in the 80s and I know a lot of people trash it but it does sound quite good. I'm talking about the stereo version though.
Hello Micheal hope you are feeling OK. Michael Fremer traveled to Abbey Road to advise on the MONO box. I would love to hear his views on this also.
Tku Michael for speaking the truth loud an clear, I have 2 original Brit pressing Revolver and Sgt Pepper that my father bought in the 60's, I got the mono box set in 2012 for 100$ stores had problem selling them, I don't know about the other albums but the OG Revolver and Pepper blows the 2009 box set away. John Lennon once said "U haven't heard the Beatles until u heard them in mono" surely not these so called Holy Grail mono's, that record labels are selling us now at exaggerated $$. Keep up the great work, as always kind regards sir.
Its also interesting to do this on The Stones Mono box. Thanks Michael for this video.
I will do that Erik
I agree Michael but I would challenge you to hunt down the original Japanese red wax mono's series which are really special, kind of expensive these days though.
Wow! It seems like the OG absolutely destroyed the Mono Box remaster! This is making me think I need to go hunt these OG's down 1 by 1 and get them all that way. Thank you for this, Michael. This was "very" informative. 👍
Rachel, don't be too concerned with getting a -1 pressing of Revolver. The -2 pressing is just as good, albeit with the mix of "Tomorrow never knows" that George Martin preferred.
Thank you, Pepper. I'm on the hunt 😎
The Revolver album in German edition from 1977 sounds beautiful.
Revolver in my opiniol doesnt sound very good in any version. The recording is extremely dry. Like Glenn Goulds recordings of the time.
A very interesting and surprising review Michael? It brings up another issue, what If people don't own any 'original pressing? They might be believing their vinyl equipment is not that good simply because all their new records sound muffled? Perhaps you could mention this problem? 👍👍
It doesn't matter about whether you have doubt with your compared records. If you find yourself with your opinion and your opinion is honest that's good and valid for us. Thanks Michael.
Nice review of this classic album. Really enjoyed this video. Maybe we have forgotten how well some of the first generation releases were. I have always thought the music produced in the 50’s and early to mid 60’s audibly is the greatest we will get regardless if Beatles, Elvis, Jazz or Blues.
The second generation releses are also very good as long they are analogue, somtimes even better then the first generation.
Great Video ! All The Beatles Albums may been in excess of one hundred thousand (100,000) pre orders in the UK. The first record that had in excess of one hundred thousand (100,000) pre orders in the UK Post The Beatles was the 1973 3T 3T pressing of David Bowie, Aladdin Sane. It would be good to compare what you get with First Pressing of Ziggy and Aladdin Sane where like The Beatles the Record Company would think "The Money Was In The Bank !" & they could spend a little more on The Beatles First Pressings ! Grest Video we don't want to get into early pressing stampers !
I didn't get the box set, I bought from Rubber Soul forward, all from the mono releases that were made at the same time. It was probably more expensive then the box at the time!
Get well soon!
I think you are right Michael. But you have one very special first pressing (one of the first). Not every first pressings Will sound the same.
The original will almost always be the best option. But that doesn't mean that another pressing of this record is worth throwing in the bin. The withdrawn press of Revolver is selling for €450.00 so for vast majority of us the comparison is moot. It's like comparing a Veyron with a Lada.
I'm an electrical engineer but I'm not an expert where/when it comes to synergy - often its a trial and error thing. What I do know is when electric devices have matched internal impedance, the power output is maximized - that goes for amp/speaker, battery/lightbulb, etc. Having watched many hardware comparison videos and reviews, I see how a pre-amp/amp combinations and their synergy can make the difference between music sounding good with an amp and a given speaker regardless of the cost of the amp(at any price). The pre-amp is often as critical if not more critical in the chain. In the cutting process, the cutting stylus is the equivalent of a speaker(transducer) and its output, its dynamic range, clarity will be influenced by the per-amplification/amplification stage and respective synergy. Since we can't do an a/b with the original mastering hardware using the current state of the master tape, there appears to be too many variables to say x or y are the reason it sounds better. I'm simply speculating but there are way too many variable including the difference between tube and solid state, OG Tubes vs. NOS tubes, etc. all which add their own flavor above and beyond synergy. Sounds like a good question to ask Chad, RKS, KG and BG next time you have them on your channel!
I agree with you. Never had that cut but the -1/-2 is better
Michael would have to agree with your conclusions on the 1st UK press of Revolver sounding better than the mono box set. There are several reasons for this. 1. original UK mono lacquer was likely cut by Harry Moss at EMI studios. No one since has been able to equal let alone better what Harry did cutting the Beatles lacquers back then. Even the current crop of EMI engineers have not been able to figure out how he did it. 2. That first UK mono press was likely a flat profile pressing (no taper profile), where the re-issue mono box set was likely a taper profile pressing (a mono record but still pressed with a stereo type tapered profile; have not measured it to confirm this). Also keep in mind the Beatles themselves spent weeks in the mastering room with mono master tape getting it to sound the way they wanted. Once done, they sent this tape to Harry Moss to cut the lacquers for the UK market. The monobox was remastered by Giles Martin I believe. Back in the 1960s the Beatles could have cared less about the stereo mix. This is documented in several books on the Beatles. Back in the day, the Beatles let some engineer at Abbey Road do the stereo mix in an afternoon session, they never even reviewed it. This album was originally recorded on a 4 track mono machine. The only pressing of Revolver that can compete with the 1st UK press mono is the Japan Red MONO released in 1982 and again in 1986 for the Japan market. It was pressed by Toshiba-EMI on Clear red virgin vinyl, with no carbon black added to the compound. The lacquers were cut by EMI in Hayes-Middlesex using a mono signal but cut with a stereo cutter head, hence the YEX prefix in the red mono dead wax.
I had 2014 mono which I thought was ok and I believe one of the ones from the box set that people were not raving about it, sold a lot slower than Sgt pepper as a stand alone. I sold that as I prefer the stereo and have an original U.K. stereo which is incredible, so quiet and amazing. Even though I prefer this album in stereo I might have to find an original mono.
HOLY SMOKES MAN! What a revelation! I never wouldn't thought that. And here, everyone bloody WORSHIPS the mono box, GEEZ... I happen to have a nice, early stereo tube cut Revolver that I bought from another member from the Steve Hoffman Forum that sounds lovely! And yes, it is also my favourite Beatles album 😊
This is interesting, what you say, because the MONO 2014 pressings were done exactly the way it has been done back in time, maybe one of the most unique cases where the analog process is identical in both cases- the OG and the new cutting. I guess it also may be a matter of personal taste..
Very interesting - this really makes me think what to get in the future (and makes it a great video)
Thx Rev .... Ica Castles Rulez
For Revolver one needs to own both the stereo and mono. The purists will go with mono but some tracks like Tomorrow Never Knows sound good in stereo.
This is pointless comparison. I can't believe anyone listen to the original v reissue, and come to the conclusion of DAY AND NIGHT better. The mono reissues and the OG parlophone are more similar than different. The tapes were barely used over the years, so it is matter of mastering. All org were cut a lot hotter similar to all records from that era, and they do sound a little fatiguing compared to the 2014 reissues.
The 2014 sound more modern, and they totally fixed all the flaws the original had. It is literally a matter of taste, modern v vintage especially in the first 2 records. I haven't had back to back listen in years between the two sets, but in totallity, from memory, the sound was either close to identical, or I find myself enjoying the modern sound more especially for Help - White Album, and the orginal slightly more for the first 4 albums. They literally barely made changes from the original tapes and mastering notes, and in aggregrate, all they did in the reissues was fixing some of the extremely high frequencies.
This is like when people swear anything with RVG in the deadwax sound 100x better KG cuts
I wish I had bought a box set new. I had no idea they would go out of print. I assumed they would stay in print like the stereo set. The mono individual albums quietly disappeared from shelves. By the time I decided to pick up a few more they were gone. Are they worth their current prices? Nah. I payed $50 for the 2014 Rubber Soul not long after they went out of print. The other three I have I bought for MSRP.
It is a way to get a minty AAA mono Beatles and I think that’s what gets people paying the big bucks.
Yes, but when you spend that amount on a UK original 606-1 you could buy the mono box and have all 13. Better yet, what would be the investment on buying pristine copies of ALL the UK originals versus the mono box?
not that much more James
I bought a sealed mint 2014 mono box set on ebay last year. I also bought a complete set of sealed mint stereo MoFi LPs. Though the stereo mixes are somewhat lopsided on the early LPs, all of the stereo MoFi LPs are FAR SUPERIOR in terms of dynamic range, quiet vinyl, and wide sound stage. These MoFi LPs were made prior to DSD and are my go-to versions for Beatles vinyl.
The Mo-Fi are regarded as pretty awful by most other people. Owned a couple at one time and not that impressed. Smiley face EQ with boosted treble and bass. Not so good on modern audiophile gear. The DSD does not affect EQ choices BTW. Always been an issue with some Mo-Fi titles. There are rumours that Mo-Fi Beatles may have had some digital element since they had only a day or two with the masters in their possession to do transfers.
I bought the MOFI Abbey Road when it came out decades ago. It sounded terrific on my budget turntable setup at the time, with lots of bass. But that is no longer what we want now; what we want today is a flat response and a well-distributed sound stage.
I bought that MOFI Abbey Road maybe 7 years ago and it sounded so lifeless. I since sold it. You’d be better off with the 2009 CD
I think that because the fact that mono is what many of these classic rock acts / albums from this period focused on, the collector who places value on this aspect wants the mono.
Great review on your video for Revolver. I have always wondered how long It took Klaus to sketch and ink the front cover.
Congratulations Michael in obtaining this pressing.These early mono pressings are renowned for groove wear.
I had the same experience on Sunday playing Wish you were here.Firstly I was happily played the recent reissue,then I remembered I had an original Uk 1st pressing.
I’ve tended not to play it because it’s a rough scratchy copy.
Any way I put it on & Wow as you’ve said night & day.
Original far & away superior.
Makes you think what we are being served up with these reissues.
This is why I won’t go near the upcoming Steely Dan(one of my favourite bands).The original best pressings sound absolutely amazing.
I’ve spent 5 years acquiring them.
It’s tempting but I’ve been burnt before buying the Mofi Dire Straits.
Michael you would not believe how good original Uk of Dire Straits sound.
👍😎
i will know very soon :-)
Hello Mickael - I do love the mono 2014 reissues but I have always found that revolver was quite muddy, far from rubber soul or sgt pepper’s fantastic sounding vinyls from that box - do you think a first pressing could be a real improvement ?
What we need is a remix of Rolling Stones Blue and Lonesome LP, bet there will be one by Don Was' son by 2066.....Glad u have the OG UK of Revolver, that's the holy grail
Michael, I've read that the new beatles in mono were cut to be played by an elliptical cartridge in stereo or mono mode... If you played it with a mono cartridge that has a spherical diamond on it rather than an elliptical, it will NOT PLAY properly and may skip or damage the vinyl unknowingly... So if a mono cartridge is used it MUST BE an ELLIPTICAL ONE..... so maybe that's why it sounds dull for a lot of your viewers.. Well done for the channel, keep it up sir...
The 2014's and no doubt the upcoming mono for that Revolver box set will be cut in mono using a STEREO lathe and needs to replayed with a regular stereo stylus.
The cartidge itself can be dedicated mono such as Ortofon's 2M which by design has less vertical output minimizing any background noises.
The exact point during the sixties when any disc swiched from using a mono lathe with a wider groove to cutting on a STEREO lathe depends on the mastering house but by the late 60's anything mono was cut on stereo lathes (and labels were purging the mono catalogue were stereo versions existed).
Over a hundred bucks for a G to VG original Revolver or the same amount for a box set. Is the difference in quality of sound on a Revolver LP really as crucial as say a Yes Relayer? Maybe so since the Beatles were beginning to incorporate “stereo effects”. I imagine the Beatles were still primarily listened to by the younger lot on transistor radios, while the older fans had money for the console stereo and that extra stereo version buck. I am hoping the upcoming Revolver box is the definitive version since, at 56 yrs old, it’s my first real Beatles album purchase. Yet in reality any Beatles album would have to sound pretty atrocious for me to care that much. Your enthusiasm has been inspiring nevertheless.
Wow, you got a very special 1st UK pressing. Very cool. For a reissue, I’m not sure they can beat the 2014 pressings, but I could of course be wrong. I’m was just gonna be buying the stereo pressing of the new Giles remix, as I’m not gonna track down an original. I’ve got an earlier UK press anyway. Now, I’ll probably order the both of them. Thanks Michael. 👍🎵😊🎶
Who’d have thought when you started down this comparison to Original/First Year Pressings you’d see such a difference that puts the favor to Originals.
It will be interesting to see these new releases by Apple, Acoustic Sounds and others who have set themselves high up on a pedestal as putting out the best. (And in fairness it may be the best to anything else but original.)
Have you spoken to Michael Fremer about this, given his hugely positive review of the Mono box set?
no i have not Sean
Micheal Fremer was invited over to Abbey Road to advise on the Mono Box Set.
@@Michael45RPM that would be an interesting one!
I think they said they are using the mastering notes from 2014 release for the new one, so should not expect too much difference on account of the mastering at least
And didn't they claim in 2014 that they were following the original 60's mono mastering documents when they re-cut this mono set?' They followed it very closely, but there is a small bump in the bass/lower midrange output on all of the mono albums pressed in 2014 that I've heard (I never bought the box-set, but I bought them separately over a few months - just missing 'Help!'), and they all sound great, and very, very close to the original UK first press 60s mono issues, of which I own pretty much all of them (just missing that 606-1 Revolver, and Yellow Submarine), except they all have a little extra boost in the bass/lower midrange.... this causes a 'thickening', or 'dulling' of the sound - slightly....
I have a decent turntable (Rega RP1), Denon amp and Q Acoustics speakers, and I can hear the slight thickening of sound. If you don't have the original 60's UK mono's to compare to, don't worry, these 2014 pressings still sound great! 👍
Only shame is that the new Revolver mono seems to be pressed in GZ - Czech Republic... not very good experience so far.. often noisy.
@@stevesstuff1450 I have the 4 of the 2014 monos bought separately (after 2019, so don’t ask😂) and I do like them standalone. I do get that the Revolver sounds congested and dull in places, but overall I am happy to have it. I would love an OG but Discogs for OGs is a crapshoot, and not everyone is as lucky as Michael to get clean copies😀
First uk mono Help ( xex 549 -2 / Xex-550 -2) sounds betters than Help of the 2014 mono box. With "a hard day's night" it's the same, first mono uk pressing has more presence and definition on guitars, but I think Sgt Peppers are best in the mono box. It's always important to remember that all beatles vinyl from "Please Please Me" to "White Album" were cut on tube equipment, that makes a big difference.
Good video, it is always interesting to talk about one of the most important bands in the history of popular music.
Great video. So much respect for you for speaking truth. And I feel better about selling my box set many years ago to a dealer. 😁🙄
Wish you would do a needle drop on the wrong mix on the early first pressings. I have heard of it but, never heard it w/ my ears. This video makes me a little nervous I ordered the new revolver box set. I hope its as good as the OG.
hmm i think they would shut him down quick George
Congratulations for reaching 30k followers Michael. Great channel.
thx whitey
Hi Michael, the pressing you have is rare not only because of the different mix of "Tomorrow Never Knows", it is rare because this is the so called "loud cut", the 606-1, which was cut too loud for the old small cheap record players of the time. Their cartridges were jumping all over the place due to the loudness of the grooves, so the youngsters brought the records back to the stores to complain, and EMI decided to recall those very first pressings after only few days, in order to issue another "softer" cut (the more common one). This is probably the reason why it sounds so good on your Einstein 😁
Thx for sharing this.. in my fever of the cold i simply forgot to mention this!!!!
@@Michael45RPM Get well soon Michael! By the way, I also own this exact pressing, so I also know how good it sounds! Looking forward to the next Reissue vs OG battle 👍
I knew about the loud cut on Rubber Soul but not Revolver. Thanks for the info
On a lower slope, I know, but the first pressings of Band On The Run were so loud they jumped even on good gear. With the Mono box, the artwork is perfect except Help! where the front cover is printed too high up. The discs are all cut on the quiet side with huge run-outs towards the label. I hope this alternate mono mix of Tomorrow Never Knows is on the upcoming box set as I don’t think I’ve heard it.
Are you sure this wasn’t for Rubber Soul only? I haven’t heard anything about a Revolver loud cut, and surely they would’ve recut side 1 at some point but it always remained as its original -2 form
I’ve come across many UK originals and have passed on them due to this 2014 box set being praised by most. Only UK original I own is abbey road due to no audiophile version being available. I might have to start hunting down originals.
try it Daniel maybe you will be as surprised as me
@Daniel Castillo: If you have a genuine first press copy of Abbey Road (Dark green Apple label, no 'Her Majesty' printed on the label, and the miss-aligned Apple logo on the sleeve rear), then you have one of the finest sounding Beatles records ever pressed! It is an excellent pressing; superb sound quality! You'd have to pay a ridiculous amount of money to find any 'audiophile pressing' that comes close!!
Mono was the mix the artists were interested in - hence the reason why they go for more money….stereo was left to the Engineers after The Beatles had left. Same for Bob Dylan records and many others until 1967 when stereo began to be more popular
They spent time on the mono mixes because getting the levels right for all the elements in a recording is ten times harder than deciding whether an instrument or voice should be placed in the left, middle or right of the soundstage.
And they didn’t even do the stereo mixes right some of the time, IMHO.
But wall to wall beats all stacked up in the middle any day of the week in my book.
Parfait Michael ! yes you can’t beat those tube cut OG’s this is just the way it is…the 2014 is way overhyped. I have one of those early copies with TNK rm and although it’s beaten as hell with big scratches on it (G rated at best) still I find it clearly superior to the 2014 on every level, even the point of the low end being somewhat « superior » on the remaster is questionable imho
Michael, for early mono pressings, do you need a mono cartridge to get best sound and tracking due to wider grooves ?
it changed 1966 i think
Hi Ian I've read an article by Noël K from hifi world magazine before the Beatles in mono came out, he had spoken with the engineer who told him... The new monos are meant to be played on a system that has an elliptical diamond if in stereo or mono but if you use a MONO CARTRIDGE that has a spherical diamond "ie" meant for ORIGINAL mono pressings it will play badly and may cause damage to the record so please use a MONO cartridge with an ELLIPTICAL diamond... Something like an Ortophon mono black etc....
They did not put original inner sleeves in the vinyl box set but they did for the CD box?
Yet again, the original wins. I have that record too, Michael and it is a phenomenal sounding disc.
I think the reason why the stereo is cheaper nowadays is due to the stereo separation. The mix separated the instruments into different speakers, so the guitar and voice might be in one channel, the drums in the other etc, which doesn't make for a full stereo experience.
Anyway, great to hear your thoughts again.
The original always wins. I love watching the $$$ fly out the window for these high-priced claptraps. You guys must mortgage your homes for this junk
0:05 I always dig how after your welcome back comment, you always look to your left and to the sky. Why’s that?
bad habit :-)
Micheal - groundhog day - when in the twenty plus original to current comparisons has the original not sounded better (sometimes astonishing) - cost of the mono box - upward to $1,000. If you were a betting man when does it make sense to cut bait. Greatly enjoy your channel though it does make sense to present original pressings we should listen and purchase.