HiRez Poll Beatles, The - Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band [BluRay]

[fac23]

Given that it might be a case of too many cooks on one side, and an audience on the other who can agree on being disappointed, just not on what exactly would have prevented such disappointment... I think they did a formidable job.
One person's criticism of a deviation from an imagined/personal "how it was supposed to be", may be another's favorite bit. It's a kind of "I want you to be bold, just don't mess with all these parts!" situation. I'll stick with the 8, because this is QQ and the surround mix is neither an adventure nor exactly revealing but nonetheless "quite good".

 

[ar surround]

...Comparing to Love is unfair though as multiple songs and samples of songs playing at the same time gives many more seperate tracks to play with. That said, I prefered the tonality of the mix to Pepper.

Yes, that is the only thing that really bothers me about the Pepper mix...it is not smooth like the Pepper tunes on Love. The new Pepper 2.0 and 5.1 are "in your face" and true to the mono which is also "in your face." I don't like the the tonality of the mono version either. Still glad to have the new mix though and keeping my rating at 9.

 

[MrSmithers]

I’ve voted a 9 for this. Let me take you down how I came to this score….

The content speaks for itself - the greatest album in the world by the greatest ever band...

Regarding the fidelity and the mix. Well to my ears this is the best you could ever hear this album and the hi res really stands out to me.

Regarding the mix… Well it might not be as aggressive as Love but to me it enhances the album, and is a more enjoyable listen because of that. I’m not necessarily looking for crazy panning or overly discrete elements considering I know how old the masters are and recorded with 4 tracks… And I already have Love. But I like the room filling sound I hear when I give it a spin. It does stick more to the original mix but I’m ok with that.

The fact that it also includes Strawberry Fields and Penny Lane is just an absolute joy. To anyone on the fence about getting it (I doubt there’s many?) it’s a must have!

My stand out tracks regarding the 5.1 are Getting Better, Being for the Benefit of Mr Kite, A Day In The Life, Strawberry Fields

 

[Clint Eastwood]

I probably could have explained it better. Having George’s voice pushed back in the mix supported the overall spiritual theme and tone of the song because it added a mysterious feel. Putting his voice out front gives a more matter of fact tone that doesn’t seem appropriate to the subject. The original mix got that right IMO. The music behind him sounds incredible in surround- I stand by that-it’s gorgeous. And I have a pretty good system that generally gets the bass right, but I find the bass as presented in this mix overwhelms things at times (edit: the bass comment is about most of the rest of Pepper, not WYWY so I should have been clearer). It would probably be ok if I turned the sub down but I don’t want a custom setting for everything I play - too lazy! But it’s still an enjoyable listen and I think my 8 was fair.

Thanks for the clarification...and let me say that a rating of 8 is very fair on any title...in the past when I used the polls(I no longer use them)to help me in making a decision to buy a title...I looked at the numbers and the comments of the voters...a 7 to 10 vote was considered purchase material....but the comments had the most bearing...because in the past I've read posts where the voter gave the title a 5 but then recommended it as a purchase...so the reasons for a vote gave me greater insight into the problems of a title..or it's merits...and once identified....I could make my own determination if the things mentioned are a concern to me...for instance.. some people don't mind a little "brightness"(compression) in a recording...but I'm very sensitive to it and it's a major consideration in any musical purchase....so when someone "claims" a recording is brickwalled....this is a huge red flag for me...it's something that would stop me from buying a title...conversely...some people care about instrument placement in a surround recording....this is not a problem for me...I don't care if the drums are in the parking lot...so comments are important...

I've mentioned the 2 indicators....score and comments....that I have used in making purchase decisions in the past....and now that I don't use the polls anymore...I had been using another element...the people factor....after a few years of using the poll threads... I have identified a group of posters I term as the "usual suspects"....when I would see a "low ball" score on a title... when the overwhelming majority consisted of high scores..it was usually one of these people...and true to their nature they would usually do a "drive by" vote...post a low score with no reasons given for their vote....but under the new forum guidelines...they can go back and change their vote and blend in with the rest of the voters...but fortunately for me I am very familiar with them and I just don't consider their input anymore...

I do share a commonality with your methods...I don't make adjustments to my system...once I have established a baseline for the system...it stays at that level...no tweaking...I did that once and found that over the course of time my system had no baseline...I kept adjusting it for every album until I lost all neutrality.....I do find it interesting that your comment about George's voice being different in the original mix and more separated in this new mix...IMO that is an important distinction that is at the very heart of the matter...as Don Henley would say....there are 2 distinct camps....one group that wants the surround material to mirror(be faithful)to the original mix with "some" enchancements...and another group that is "surround centric" and wants the maximum surround effect....regardless of how far it strays from the original mix....the LOVE advocates...or a trip with the Flaming Lips

I started out in the hobby in the "Love" group...I wanted every kind of panning and extreme surround measures to be employed...but over the course of time the novelty of that approach wore off...and although I do enjoy the LOVE disc...I don't look at it as a gateway to previous memories of the past....it just doesn't bring back the same memories as the new Peppers mix...because it sounds so different...it's great for what it is....but what it is isn't original....it's a concept...not an album...a guilty pleasure to be sure....

Thanks for taking the time to render a more detailed explanation...now I understand your point of view and I certainly can appreciate it

 

[MrSmithers]

...no tweaking...I did that once and found that over the course of time my system had no baseline...

I may have read that as no twerking and been slightly baffled momentarily! Needed to go back and read that line again!

Cool post - makes sense...

 

[markshan]

It would actually be quite lovely if Giles Martin himself explained the guidelines he took into account when remixing Pepper into surround

He'd have to be an idiot of Roseanne Barr proportions to do that. People (myself included) are tearing him a new one based on speculation. Can you even imagine what would happen if we had actual quotes to pick apart?

Bottom line, it's The Beatles. No matter what they did, half the world would be happy and half appalled.

 

[4-earredwonder]

He'd have to be an idiot of Roseanne Barr proportions to do that. People (myself included) are tearing him a new one based on speculation. Can you even imagine what would happen if we had actual quotes to pick apart?

Bottom line, it's The Beatles. No matter what they did, half the world would be happy and half appalled.

Well, markshan, Roseanne's defense was ambien [?] but since the Pepper mix, as I stated was SO controversial, pro and con, I would've thought a wee bit of insight might've been appropriate but as you suggest.....probably too little too late.

At this juncture, we should probably be more concerned with his 'approach' to the White Album remix.

But I do have to agree with the above posters, that sonically, at least, the LOVE remix was audibly more soothing to the ears....and had to, in all conscience, drop my Pepper vote down to an '8.'

 

[markshan]

At this juncture, we should probably be more concerned with his 'approach' to the White Album remix.

Seems that one is already in the can as well. We should concern ourselves with whether or not he can top the Rockband AR.

 

[rusinurbe]

Still out on my own with a 5
Everything I have ever read about the Beatles at this period was they were pushing the sound envelope trying new things and I still believe that had 5.1 been around at the time the surround would be closer to 'Love' than the tame mix we have here.

Unfortunately as well the blu ray content was lacking having been spoilt by King Crimson XTC and Yes. why not give us the original mixes as well in hi rez

Sonically it's sounds as good as I have ever heard it but the piles of disappointment at what have been weighs heavy on this release

 

[Clint Eastwood]

Well, markshan, Roseanne's defense was ambien [?] but since the Pepper mix, as I stated was SO controversial, pro and con, I would've thought a wee bit of insight might've been appropriate but as you suggest.....probably too little too late.

At this juncture, we should probably be more concerned with his 'approach' to the White Album remix.

But I do have to agree with the above posters, that sonically, at least, the LOVE remix was audibly more soothing to the ears....and had to, in all conscience, drop my Pepper vote down to an '8.'

So your so called "vote" has changed due to "peer pressure"...we may differ on things on here but I always thought you could at least make your own decisions....I guess I was wrong...you are a follower...I'll keep that in mind for future reference when you suggest music...knowing that you could change your mind at any time...there is nothing wrong with an 8...it's just how you got there that doesn't instill confidence in your decision making process...it's OK Ralphie...I still love you

 

[markshan]

Still out on my own with a 5
Everything I have ever read about the Beatles at this period was they were pushing the sound envelope trying new things and I still believe that had 5.1 been around at the time the surround would be closer to 'Love' than the tame mix we have here.

This is why I only gave a 7.

 

[Clint Eastwood]

Still out on my own with a 5
Everything I have ever read about the Beatles at this period was they were pushing the sound envelope trying new things and I still believe that had 5.1 been around at the time the surround would be closer to 'Love' than the tame mix we have here.

Unfortunately as well the blu ray content was lacking having been spoilt by King Crimson XTC and Yes. why not give us the original mixes as well in hi rez

Sonically it's sounds as good as I have ever heard it but the piles of disappointment at what have been weighs heavy on this release

Don't fear...today's 5 could be tomorrow's 1...under this new forum feature you really aren't voting...you are just making suggestions..so you can flip flop as much as you please

 

[jimfisheye]

Still out on my own with a 5
Everything I have ever read about the Beatles at this period was they were pushing the sound envelope trying new things and I still believe that had 5.1 been around at the time the surround would be closer to 'Love' than the tame mix we have here.

Unfortunately as well the blu ray content was lacking having been spoilt by King Crimson XTC and Yes. why not give us the original mixes as well in hi rez

Sonically it's sounds as good as I have ever heard it but the piles of disappointment at what have been weighs heavy on this release

They were very much into pushing the envelope with sonics! George Martin was decades ahead of his time with that. This is the reason I'm offended by some of these recent releases because they seem to dismiss that. They may be hitting a higher than average level and that's all well and good. My 35 year or however old reissue on last centuries technology sounds better/cleaner/more dynamic.

My only defense if I exaggerated any points in posts about this (which may have happened) is it was a reflection of my disappointment and what came across as a dismissal of the level of pushing for excellence in earlier releases.

 

[4-earredwonder]

So your so called "vote" has changed due to "peer pressure"...we may differ on things on here but I always thought you could at least make your own decisions....I guess I was wrong...you are a follower...I'll keep that in mind for future reference when you suggest music...knowing that you could change your mind at any time...there is nothing wrong with an 8...it's just how you got there that doesn't instill confidence in your decision making process...it's OK Ralphie...I still love you

NOT true, Clint. I'm hardly one to bow under peer pressure but as I've stated in previous posts regarding the Pepper remix.....analogue machines circa 1967 at best managed 40~15,000kHz........The TIZZY top end of the Pepper remix, I can almost assure you, was not on the original masters. And 81 minutes of the LOVE album was absolutely non~fatiguing whereas Pepper IS.

And your assertion that you'll avoid future music suggestions from me is positively ridiculous.....but wholly your perogative!

BTW, this remains the singular vote that I've changed and IMO, a 10 vote suggests PERFECTION. If Giles remix of Pepper is your idea of a 10, then fine. As you even stated, 8 ain't bad and it clearly defines ON MY SYSTEM what it deserves.

LOVE remains THE perfect 10....and I will state, unequivocally at this juncture, that it was Sir George and NOT Giles who masterminded that incredible remix!

 

[Clint Eastwood]

NOT true, Clint. I'm hardly one to bow under peer pressure but as I've stated in previous posts regarding the Pepper remix.....analogue machines circa 1967 at best managed 40~15,000kHz........The TIZZY top end of the Pepper remix, I can almost assure you, was not on the original masters. And 81 minutes of the LOVE album was absolutely non~fatiguing whereas Pepper IS.

And your assertion that you'll avoid future music suggestions from me is positively ridiculous.

BTW, this remains the singular vote that I've changed and IMO, a 10 vote suggests PERFECTION. If Giles remix of Pepper is your idea of a 10, then fine. As you even stated, 8 ain't bad and it clearly defines ON MY SYSTEM what it deserves.

LOVE remains THE perfect 10!

In regards to LOVE...I might have to go back and change my vote...thinking back on that release I'm suddenly getting "OFFENDED" at the way they altered that recording....and perhaps this "disappointment" virus that seems to be spreading on the forum has finally hit me...even though most of us are adults and shouldn't cry and moan about a music release...it seems to be happening anyway....hard to believe this is happening in a "hobby"...good thing it's not important...like real life problems....

Just kidding Ralphie about changing my vote...I'd never do something like that...and I've made some mistakes on some releases..but I'm not so insecure that I have to worry about things like that...just to let you know..if you change your mind again next week...I'll support you...you can flip/flop as much as a salmon does going upstream

 

[rusinurbe]

Don't fear...today's 5 could be tomorrow's 1...under this new forum feature you really aren't voting...you are just making suggestions..so you can flip flop as much as you please

Have not changed anything so far and I don't plan to as it's my thoughts at the time of release, even though I have been tempted by the feature.

I think snoods new AC unit is more aggressive than this some bananas to make snood feel at home.

 

[von kulper]

Snagged this from Amazon for like $75 a few weeks ago, and finally got around to listening. I don't have anything profound to add, but just a few thoughts after my first listen... In short - inconsistent and some missed potential (I say this rather lightly), sometimes amazing and as whole it's mostly... fun

My wife and I (she's a MASSIVE Beatles fan... there's so much Beatles music in the house and car that I'm actually quite annoyed of them most of the time ...) thoroughly enjoyed it. A few songs were absolutely stunning in surround, and a few were kind of duds. Most songs seemed to have an active surround field, but there were times where the surrounds seemed more a wide extension of a stereo signal than discrete elements (didn't take notes so I don't have any specifics off the top of my head ), despite the song having a rather complex orchestration and being RIPE for a good surround presentation.

Other songs, for example - Within You Without You, BLEW MY SOCKS OFF. I turned that one up LOUD!! Surprisingly, WYWY has never been a song I've ever really enjoyed much, but this release nailed it. Sitar in the front sound-stage; discrete orchestration in the rear, and it just sounded huge. Other highlights were Strawberry Fields (a bit experimental with the percussion on this one, definitely stepping out from the conservative mixing zone) and Penny Lane (IIRC, anyway).

I'll need to spend some more time with this before I vote - I also want to compare some of the songs to the Love version.

For now, based off the mix only, I'm feeling a strong seven after my first listen. A number of songs were underwhelming, mix-wise; a few others were incredible.

 

[kap'n krunch]

NOT true, Clint. I'm hardly one to bow under peer pressure but as I've stated in previous posts regarding the Pepper remix.....analogue machines circa 1967 at best managed 40~15,000kHz.......

Ummm.. a big NO...Recording MACHINES had way more frequency response than RECORDING PLAYBACK gear...AAMOF on one of Mark Lewisohn's books, it stated that , while mixing the end chord at "A day in the life" they had cut off the end of it before it was actually quiet because they couldn't hear it ...they found it out 20 years later when doing the CD master...and recordings from the late 50s already went up to 30K and more!!!
AAMOF some 78s actually went all the way past 30K (yes, 78s!!)...

Just my 2 cents...

 

[kap'n krunch]

SCREW THE HATERS!!!!
THIS
IS
AN
AWESOME MIX!!!

 

[Mesozoic Mike]

I was wondering if anybody else misses George's count coming out of the instrumental break, just before the last verse. At 3:47, on all my older versions of Pepper, I can distinctly hear George say "one two".
But now it's missing. Proof to me this new version of Pepper is not 100% faithful to the original.
I still like it though.