'The Beatles' (White Album) [50th Anniversary Box Set with 5.1 Blu-ray Disc!]

It's nice to know Giles Martin is "on side "for surround projects .


INXS & Beatles ♡

I'm sorry, but I rather enjoy the sgt. Pepper 5.1, it gets played regularly, I am way up for the entire Beatles catalog remixed to hi rez 5.1. And I would purchase every title. And I am such a Beatles fan that I wouldn't care if Donald Duck was on the remix committee.

I've heard some of the "multitracks" that are "out there" for Sgt. Peppers and The White Album... for Sgt. Pepper, there is a discrete four track which, if this is what Giles had to work with, I think he did a great job and I don't think we could have gotten much better from anyone else (I'm not a professional mixer, though, so others more "in the know" may have another opinion). For The White Album, there are some very discrete multitracks (of RockBand origin) that aren't computer-generated (as many of the early Beatles RockBand multitracks are*), and I'm sure Giles has access to even more discrete tracks from The White Album, so I'm thinking we'll get a much more discrete (but maybe not too adventurous) mix. Of Giles' three surround mixes that I've heard, "Love" and "Kick" are excellent surround mixes so I'm confident we'll get something similar with The White Album. Can't wait!

I would purchase every Beatles Album remixed in surround by Giles Martin (I'll just temper my expectations accordingly based on the limitations of the source material)... (I hope I get the chance to buy them all)

*this is an assumption I made based on listening to RockBand multitracks of early Beatles songs... they just sound like some sort of processor was used to separate the various instruments

skherbeck said:

I've heard some of the "multitracks" that are "out there" for Sgt. Peppers and The White Album... for Sgt. Pepper, there is a discrete four track which, if this is what Giles had to work with, I think he did a great job and I don't think we could have gotten much better from anyone else (I'm not a professional mixer, though, so others more "in the know" may have another opinion).

Click to expand...

The circulated 4-track is a later generation than what Giles worked with for this release. There were earlier 4-tracks—multiple synchronized reels—which were then bounced down to (eventually) a single 4-track for the final mono and stereo mixes in '67. Giles was able to use the first generation 4-tracks in most, if not all, cases.

milt said:

But then again, Revolution #9 in 5.1???
Mind-blowing

Click to expand...

Have you heard the Revolution Take 20? There's a copy on YouTube, but sadly it is far too slow.

This might not be the most appropriate spot for this comment. If so, my apologies. But I've always been reasonably impressed with DKA's upmix of The White Album.
IIRC, it seems fairly discrete and kind of old-school quad feeling.
The Mrs. and I both like it.

SDE has speculated on what 2018 has in store and had this to say about The White Album:
http://www.superdeluxeedition.com/feature/sde-reissue-preview-for-2018/

“The rumours are that Apple and Universal will reissue a 50th anniversary edition of ‘The Beatles‘ aka The White Album this year. The 50th anniversary is in November so if this happens, it won’t be a summer release like last year’s Sgt. Pepper. Expect ‘Esher demos’, outtakes and more, although a 5.1 mix of the entire double album doesn’t seem very likely…”

An incomplete 5.1 mix would be such a let down! I wonder where this hypothesis stems from?

LennonCobain said:

SDE has speculated on what 2018 has in store and had this to say about The White Album:
http://www.superdeluxeedition.com/feature/sde-reissue-preview-for-2018/

“The rumours are that Apple and Universal will reissue a 50th anniversary edition of ‘The Beatles‘ aka The White Album this year. The 50th anniversary is in November so if this happens, it won’t be a summer release like last year’s Sgt. Pepper. Expect ‘Esher demos’, outtakes and more, although a 5.1 mix of the entire double album doesn’t seem very likely…”

An incomplete 5.1 mix would be such a let down! I wonder where this hypothesis stems from?

Click to expand...

LennonCobain said:

SDE has speculated on what 2018 has in store and had this to say about The White Album:
http://www.superdeluxeedition.com/feature/sde-reissue-preview-for-2018/

“The rumours are that Apple and Universal will reissue a 50th anniversary edition of ‘The Beatles‘ aka The White Album this year. The 50th anniversary is in November so if this happens, it won’t be a summer release like last year’s Sgt. Pepper. Expect ‘Esher demos’, outtakes and more, although a 5.1 mix of the entire double album doesn’t seem very likely…”

An incomplete 5.1 mix would be such a let down! I wonder where this hypothesis stems from?

Click to expand...

I wonder. I don't think Apple would issue an incomplete 5.1 remix of the White Album.

Unless they are missing some multis (very unlikely), the only track that could be upmixed to surround would be Revolution 9 as some parts were flown in during the stereo mixing (even the mono mix is a fold down of the stereo).

If one reads further down into the comments on that SDE blog post, you'll realize Paul's comment is purely speculative.
Chances are we probably will not know more about any of this until later in the year.

All the tapes exist from the White Album sessions. Starting in 1964, Abbey Road Studios saved all session tapes of the Beatles, Mark Lewisohn got to listen to them all and wrote a book about each one.

A 2014 interview with Giles Martin regarding his Beatle's surround philosophy: http://www.soundbard.com/soundbard/...ound-and-what-fab-album-he-might-tackle-next/

Martin: I think the WHITE ALBUM in surround would be fabulous.

4-earredwonder said:

A 2014 interview with Giles Martin regarding his Beatle's surround philosophy: http://www.soundbard.com/soundbard/...ound-and-what-fab-album-he-might-tackle-next/

Martin: I think the WHITE ALBUM in surround would be fabulous.

Click to expand...

Giles- "In the early days of surround, I was given a Marvin Gaye disc, and the guitarist played behind me. I would never go to a gig where I was standing next to the kick drum and the guitarist was playing behind me!"

My retort- Well that's no fun...

sjcorne said:

Giles- "In the early days of surround, I was given a Marvin Gaye disc, and the guitarist played behind me. I would never go to a gig where I was standing next to the kick drum and the guitarist was playing behind me!"

My retort- Well that's no fun...

Click to expand...

I did read that and since I do love the discrete surround mix of What's Going on it kind of pointed to Gile's ultra conservative approach to surround although I DO agree that the LOVE album is one of the most cherished surround discs in my collection.

I agree with Giles. I had a full blown quad set up in the 70s and I sold after less than a year. And the main reason I sold was because the mixing was so horrible on the records I bought. And they were way too expensive.

4-earredwonder said:

I did read that and since I do love the discrete surround mix of What's Going on it kind of pointed to Gile's ultra conservative approach to surround although I DO agree that the LOVE album is one of the most cherished surround discs in my collection.

Click to expand...

I assume he's referring to either "Let's Get It On" or "The Marvin Gaye Collection", both released on SACD/DVD-A with 5.1 mixes. The quad mixes of "Let's Get It On" and "What's Going On" are only available on Japanese quad vinyl, so I doubt he's heard those.

Though "Love" and Sgt Pepper certainly have their moments, I don't agree with this philosophy at all. Surround mixes of studio material are not meant to replicate a live performance...it's ok to spread things out and immerse the listener as long as the mix honors the sound of the original. People like ES and SW understand that. The guys working on quad at Columbia back in the day for the most part understood it too, though they went for a more experimental approach that some seem to appreciate more than others.

I respect both views, but one thing I'll say: Giles' Beatles 1+ was an absolute travesty. That is NOT a surround title, or even a 3.1 mix.

seilerbird said:

I agree with Giles. I had a full blown quad set up in the 70s and I sold after less than a year. And the main reason I sold was because the mixing was so horrible on the records I bought. And they were way too expensive.

Click to expand...

That's interesting... when I look at the top 15 surround mixes in the Surround Poll, these are all aggressive mixes with instruments (such as guitars) behind the listener. Giles states that he didn't like this sort of thing... I'm curious, what are your top few surround mixes? (I'm not trying to be antagonistic, but just trying to see other points of view)

seilerbird said:

I agree with Giles. I had a full blown quad set up in the 70s and I sold after less than a year. And the main reason I sold was because the mixing was so horrible on the records I bought. And they were way too expensive.

Click to expand...

Unless you had a QUAD Open Reel set up in the early 70's, what QUAD decoder did you have that could decode those LPs so accurately? Just curious.

seilerbird said:

I agree with Giles. I had a full blown quad set up in the 70s and I sold after less than a year. And the main reason I sold was because the mixing was so horrible on the records I bought. And they were way too expensive.

Click to expand...

I agree with 4-earred wonder's post above- you were probably listening to the Columbia SQ Matrix records through an early decoder that produced no front-to-back separation. I bet many people felt the same way back in the '70s- the poor results of that system were a major factor in the failure of quad. I find I'm often quite unhappy with the results of SQ decodes done with a superior decoder (Involve, Tate II, Adobe Audition Script).

The real mixes- untouched by matrix encoding- are incredibly directional and discrete. Unfortunately the only way to hear them as intended back in the day was 8-track tape! Kind of a deal-breaker for those who don't like putting up with low fidelity and speed warble.

I implore you to check out any of the SACDs that use Columbia quad mixes if you haven't already...there are quite a few out there released by several labels (Sony US, EMI, Audio Fidelity, Dutton-Vocation, and Sony Japan to name a few). They are among the best in my collection.

Aside from those, another great place to start if you're a quad disbeliever would be the Chicago Quadio box set...the Chicago quad mixes done by Columbia in the 1970s are incredible and comparable to modern 5.1 in approach (drums & bass, vocals upfront, horns and rhythm supporting from rears). That set is my all-time favorite surround release.

sjcorne said:

Giles- "In the early days of surround, I was given a Marvin Gaye disc, and the guitarist played behind me. I would never go to a gig where I was standing next to the kick drum and the guitarist was playing behind me!"

My retort- Well that's no fun...

Click to expand...

i wonder if using where instruments are positioned in the soundfield in a gig setting as his reference point for how to pan a surround remix of a studio track is part of "the problem"..