• QuadraphonicQuad welcomes you and encourages your participation! Treat all members with respect. Please keep all discussions civil, even when you have a strong opinion on a particular topic.

    Do not offer for free, offer for sale, offer for trade, or request copies or files of copyrighted material - no matter how rare or unavailable to the public they might be. We do not condone the illegal sharing of music. There are many places on the internet where you can participate in such transactions, but QuadraphonicQuad is not one of them. We are here to encourage and support new multichannel releases from those companies that still provide them and as such the distribution of illegal copies of recordings is counter-productive to that effort. Any posts of this sort will be deleted without notification.

    Please try to avoid discussions that pit one format against another. Hint for new users: make liberal use of the search facilities here at QuadraphonicQuad. Our message base is an incredibly rich resource of detailed information on virtually all topics pertaining to surround-sound. You will be surprised at what you can find with a little digging!

BluRay Music Video Poll The Beatles - 1/1+ [BluRay]

Help Support QuadraphonicQuad:

Rate the BluRay Disc of The Beatles - 1+


  • Total voters
    61

JonUrban

Forum Curmudgeon
Staff member
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Mar 2, 2002
Messages
15,952
Location
Connecticut
This is indeed a strangely constructed Blu-Ray disc (Disc One anyway, as I haven't gotten to disc Two yet). 'Eclectic' is right. In order to get a quick look at the BluRay last night, I just let DVDFab9 do it's thing with it. It revealed a LOT of "titles", over SIXTY!!!, on the disc. Using DVDFab, I converted all of the DTS 5.1 tracks to FLAC files and let it rip. What it displayed to me was some really strange formatting.

The earlier numbered "titles" consisted of multiple songs, and later the same songs are represented in titles of their own. Very odd. Once I got the audio into Sound Forge (16/48) and checked it out it was clearly revealed throughout that this is an ambient mix. They might have well have just run the stereo through a Surround Master, the rears might have fared better! However, for the late '60s tracks, the lead vocal is sorta separated in the center channel, but it sounds very hollow, almost like you were listening to it over a phone line on some of them.

And as for the reported "little bits and pieces in the rears", I didn't hear it. For example, in "Yellow Submarine", the reply vocal (i.e "As we live a life of ease" "a life of ease") is there in the right rear but it's also in the right front, which to me is a mild disappointment. And on Eleanor Rigby, a tune we all have heard on Anthology and Love in decent surround, this version is strictly a "Pro-Logic Sounding Ambient" presentation.

The video's are, of course, historic, but as I watched them I not only felt old, but after 50 years, I've heard these "hits" so many times that I was almost wishing they would hurry up so I could get to the next one. (I know, Blaspheme!) But really, this would have been an amazing release when VHS first appeared, or even when LaserDisc and DVD came out, but if you remove yourself from your youth and the whole Beatlemania thing, most of these are pretty dated looking films as you might expect, especially the non-performance videos.

ASIDE: I remember after the Beatles broke up how I was so bummed, and looked for every solo release that came around. All through the '70s any Beatles video sighting was very rare either on TV and/or at the movies. A Hard Days Night, Help!, and Let it Be disappeared and were rarely seen. These promo videos were traded at conventions and swap meets on various poorly recorded tapes. In the late '70s a midnight showing of Magical Mystery Tour might be able to be found on a Saturday Night, but you were not going to see any Beatles filmed performances at all through most of the '70s and '80s, until their 3 movies came out on VHS and LD. (Even today Let it Be has yet to be made available [Yes, I have the LD and there was a beta])

So, these videos coming out 35 years ago would have been monumental. Today, they are basically just another product at the few stores that still sell this stuff.

It's all great, it's all nice to see finally come out, but IMHO, it's a few decades too late, and the 5.1 Remix is disappointing at best. I supposed we should be happy with the Anthology and Film 5.1, as well as the "Love" DVD-A, but instead, I feel a bit ambivilant, mostly because of the time lag and the amazing joy we experienced when Anthology and Love hit the streets. It's too bad that the audio here did not more resemble those earlier video releases, or even the "McCartney Years", which is an impressive audio and video presentation without it being too overly surround.

Your results may vary.
 

zobalob

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
42
Location
Glasgow, Scotland
My thoughts exactly.

The so called "surround" mixes are a real disappointment to put it mildly, especially since this is used as a selling point for the set. Like you I struggle to hear any real, discrete use of the rears at all, only a muddy reverb and even then have to move close to the rear speakers to convince myself that anything is happening at all. Disregarding Love (a special project that required aggressive surround mixes) the best surround mixes of Beatles music, e.g. Anthology, Yellow Submarine, Help! have been done by people other than Giles, he should not be the person producing surround mixes of this material IMO as his philosophy regarding surround is that the music should be in front of you and not all around you. Dreadful mixes, I feel cheated, gave it 2 for surround content, fidelity is great as is content but this is a surround forum.
 

ProgRules

600 Club - QQ All-Star
Joined
Apr 18, 2012
Messages
648
Location
Charlottesville VA
There is more surround activity on disc 2. Not a lot, but more. And Within You Without You/ Tomorrow Never Knows is actually a pretty immersive mix (ironic that the shortest song gets the best 5.1 mix).

As for the poll, I'd say fidelity varies from great to good, content is great, surround is a real letdown for the most part. I'm going to vote a 5. Though personally, I don't think this even belongs in the polls. It's a video release w/ a surround mix that is meant to service the videos, not to stand on it's own. I don't think it's fair to judge it against audio releases, but if anyone is using the polls to research it's surround goodness, it should get a low score.

That being said, if I was scoring it as a video release, I'd give it an 8 or 9.

As for being burnt out on these old songs/vids, I'm not in the same boat as many/most of you. I was only ever a casual Beatles fan. My 1st exposure to them was via the cartoon TV show as a kid. As a teen, I considered them as oldies (they had not been a band for a while by then). Great oldies, mind you, but oldies nonetheless who I had a hard time taking seriously after learning to know them as goofy cartoon characters. I only ever had the Red and Blue comps, the White Album and Let It Be on vinyl and never got any digital versions of them until Love, then the BBC discs (which I only bought b/c they were on sale for $4.99 for each double CD- though I really like them now that I've heard them). Since those LP's (esp. the comps) were worn out long ago, I've heard these songs very little since the 70's. But it's amazing how ingrained they are upon my brain, even decades after my last listen. I think maybe those songs got imprinted into my 5 yr old brain when I watched the TV show.

So maybe that's one reason why I'm enjoying this release more than most of you, despite the tame 5.1 mixes. I've also never seen the vast majority of the vids.

But if you're looking for good 5.1 mixes of the Beatles, seek out Love before this. If you already have Love, don't expect anything at all similar from this.
 

Clint Eastwood

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
11,628
Location
Int Space Station
My thoughts exactly.

The so called "surround" mixes are a real disappointment to put it mildly, especially since this is used as a selling point for the set. Like you I struggle to hear any real, discrete use of the rears at all, only a muddy reverb and even then have to move close to the rear speakers to convince myself that anything is happening at all. Disregarding Love (a special project that required aggressive surround mixes) the best surround mixes of Beatles music, e.g. Anthology, Yellow Submarine, Help! have been done by people other than Giles, he should not be the person producing surround mixes of this material IMO as his philosophy regarding surround is that the music should be in front of you and not all around you. Dreadful mixes, I feel cheated, gave it 2 for surround content, fidelity is great as is content but this is a surround forum.
Interesting that you mentioned that fidelity is "great" and content is "great" but then you came up with a 2 for your score. Evidently in your world "great" on the polls means a score of 1. There are 4 elements involved in the score(Jon included packaging), and 3 of them are placed as a reminder right where you post your score on the poll. Fidelity, surround and content are the "main" factors involved in the scoring process. So 1 point for that "great" fidelity and 1 point for that "great" content. You could have a bright future as an Olympic judge in figure skating with that type of scoring system. Sorry to hear you feel cheated by the mean old record company. My heartfelt condolences go out to you. It's probably the only "non discrete" surround mix you have ever purchased. If it makes you feel better I have dozens of concert videos that fall in the non discrete category, and shockingly enough I even have some dedicated "audio" only discs that sound that way.
 

EMB

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Feb 8, 2004
Messages
4,104
Location
The Top 40 Radio of My Mind
Well of course this title belongs in the polls: if you're going to advertise surround sound, then you should be offering surround sound. But this issue really goes back to the days when stereo was first introduced to the public, which was 1958. It didn't take long for labels to begin using various methods to take recordings that were mono only and begin to process or 'rechannel' them. This was not done to make them sound better, or even stereo, as some of the labels had the temerity to claim; nor was there any 'consumer demand' for such things; rather, it was to get the extra buck that a real stereo release got back in those days.

When VHS and Beta started to take off, there was a similar mentality, although at the beginning the most that could be done was synthesize a mono film or music track into Dolby Surround, which then gave way to more elaborate mixes, these days 5.1 being the norm. But if you have multitracks to work with--and most of the Beatles' music does still exist that way--there is no excuse NOT to go back and do some decent mixes. Stereo or mono mixes can be put on separate areas of the disc, too, so there were many options that could have been employed here. I haven't heard this one yet, but Jon's review is very disappointing. This appears to be another 'who gives a fig about the sound' approach, which is insulting to even casual fans, who have come to expect real 5.1 in movies and some music discs, so why not this one?

Admittedly the early tracks wouldn't offer much in the way of decent surround, but as the ANTHOLOGY package proved, with a little work you can create something acceptable from very little, and the more elaborate later material would have been great fun in 5.1, And given the Beatles' stature and legacy, wouldn't you think they'd get the deluxe treatment? Regardless of how the McCartney and Lennon discs have been remixed, you do get what comes off as sensible surround for much of it, so why not here? What's the point of offering less? As for Giles, given what he did with LOVE, why shouldn't we expect equally aggressive remixing for this one? Why wouldn't he?

That there is still interest in the band and the era fifty years after the fact is a good thing; there'll always be young folks coming up who get a chance to hear what all the fuss was about. But this would not seem to be the best exemplar but, as it is music and not cinema, perhaps surround expectations aren't the same.

ED :)
 

Franklin

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
1,509
Interesting that you mentioned that fidelity is "great" and content is "great" but then you came up with a 2 for your score. Evidently in your world "great" on the polls means a score of 1. There are 4 elements involved in the score(Jon included packaging), and 3 of them are placed as a reminder right where you post your score on the poll. Fidelity, surround and content are the "main" factors involved in the scoring process. So 1 point for that "great" fidelity and 1 point for that "great" content. You could have a bright future as an Olympic judge in figure skating with that type of scoring system. Sorry to hear you feel cheated by the mean old record company. My heartfelt condolences go out to you. It's probably the only "non discrete" surround mix you have ever purchased. If it makes you feel better I have dozens of concert videos that fall in the non discrete category, and shockingly enough I even have some dedicated "audio" only discs that sound that way.
But all the 10s that litter this board when even the comments associated with them mention some kind of fault or disappointment are okay. It's fine to disagree, but you could be a whole lot kinder about it.
 

Clint Eastwood

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
11,628
Location
Int Space Station
I had my first listen last night and I have no regrets about the purchase. I didn't go into this purchase with unrealistic expectations and I didn't think this VIDEO release was going to be like the LOVE audio disc. Of course I hoped for a "proper" surround mix but wasn't shocked or felt cheated when that wasn't the case. As Jon has mentioned in the past we should listen to a poll title more than once and take some time in the evaluation process, which I will do. I was surprised and a little disappointed that the poll was put up so fast with this title. In the past he held polls back so people just wouldn't vote on emotion(they were just so glad to have the title in surround that they would give it a 10)and would involve some time in reaching a decision on the score. I think that might happen on this poll; in reverse. People had such high expectations that weren't met and now they are going to reflect that in their scores. I don't want to see another fiasco like the Dark Side Of The Moon SACD poll.

I'll revisit this after more listens, but if someone is buying this solely for the surround qualities I would advise them to look elsewhere. If they love the content and don't want to skip thru endless "fluff"(band conversations and interviews)and get right to the music, this is your ticket to ride. I'm sure that outside the surround community this will be well received by music fans as a treasure trove of great music and video memories of one of the greatest bands of all time.
 

Clint Eastwood

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
11,628
Location
Int Space Station
But all the 10s that litter this board when even the comments associated with them mention some kind of fault or disappointment are okay. It's fine to disagree, but you could be a whole lot kinder about it.

I thought I had injected some humor in there with "mean old record company" and of course the Olympic judge...think of it as more Dennis Moore Jr. type of humor...not trying to be hard on someone...maybe a :) is in order...this isn't life or death....it's just a music poll...and I tried to convey that to someone who felt(in his words)"cheated"...so a little levity and a little truth was included...certainly not with the intent of any malice...I'm not the mean spirited type..
 

EMB

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Feb 8, 2004
Messages
4,104
Location
The Top 40 Radio of My Mind
Correct you are, and I'm going to buy it, knowing it isn't going to be a sonic delight. It has historical value and since it's the Beatles, it's going to be entertaining regardless.

As for the PF SACD poll, I think that was a reaction to the new mix relative to the old one that everyone had been listening and were used to for so many years. I think both hold up well, just different approaches to a very elaborate recording that could still be remixed any numbers of ways and be a lot of fun to hear. I'm not sure putting up the poll 'fast' is going to affect the overall judgment of the disc over the long haul. As for the sound, the remastering of classic material tends to be controversial regardless of the end result, since some folks simply prefer the old vinyl sound to, say, the later remasterings, even if their preference isn't warranted by reality.

ED :)
 

Clint Eastwood

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
11,628
Location
Int Space Station
Correct you are, and I'm going to buy it, knowing it isn't going to be a sonic delight. It has historical value and since it's the Beatles, it's going to be entertaining regardless.

As for the PF SACD poll, I think that was a reaction to the new mix relative to the old one that everyone had been listening and were used to for so many years. I think both hold up well, just different approaches to a very elaborate recording that could still be remixed any numbers of ways and be a lot of fun to hear. I'm not sure putting up the poll 'fast' is going to affect the overall judgment of the disc over the long haul. As for the sound, the remastering of classic material tends to be controversial regardless of the end result, since some folks simply prefer the old vinyl sound to, say, the later remasterings, even if their preference isn't warranted by reality.

ED :)
In regards to the low ball votes on the PF poll....I don't think it was the mix that caused 8 votes of (1) on a title that has 73 votes of (10)...there was a defective disc at that time and I'm guessing that was the reason...btw you voted a 9 on that poll HERE...I think that is the last I should speak of that poll...this is another poll thread and I should stay on topic..
 

fredblue

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
23,305
Location
London, England
Interesting that you mentioned that fidelity is "great" and content is "great" but then you came up with a 2 for your score. Evidently in your world "great" on the polls means a score of 1. There are 4 elements involved in the score(Jon included packaging), and 3 of them are placed as a reminder right where you post your score on the poll. Fidelity, surround and content are the "main" factors involved in the scoring process. So 1 point for that "great" fidelity and 1 point for that "great" content. You could have a bright future as an Olympic judge in figure skating with that type of scoring system. Sorry to hear you feel cheated by the mean old record company. My heartfelt condolences go out to you. It's probably the only "non discrete" surround mix you have ever purchased. If it makes you feel better I have dozens of concert videos that fall in the non discrete category, and shockingly enough I even have some dedicated "audio" only discs that sound that way.
Ouch.. I'm withdrawing from this thread sorry (not only do I not have it so thats a fair prerequisite to discounting anything I say about it anyway!) but seriously feelings are running higher than I'd like for just a gentle discussion about music so before things get too ugly.. I'm out, best of British luck to you all..! :smokin
 

Clint Eastwood

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jun 11, 2014
Messages
11,628
Location
Int Space Station
Ouch.. I'm withdrawing from this thread sorry (not only do I not have it so thats a fair prerequisite to discounting anything I say about it anyway!) but seriously feelings are running higher than I'd like for just a gentle discussion about music so before things get too ugly.. I'm out, best of British luck to you all..! :smokin
I think you are misreading my intentions....I'm not being mean spirited at all..at least that is not my intention:)...no more than your playful expressions on here about a variety of topics...c'mon Adam...
 

fredblue

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
QQ Supporter
Joined
Mar 30, 2009
Messages
23,305
Location
London, England
I think you are misreading my intentions....I'm not being mean spirited at all..at least that is not my intention:)...no more than your playful expressions on here about a variety of topics...c'mon Adam...
I know, I know.. I love ya baby! :upthumb

Ps. check your PMs ;)
 

cupboy

2K Club - QQ Super Nova
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
4,892
Location
UT, USA
Why doesn't the back of the case indicate which tracks are live? I prefer all studio recordings when it comes to the Beatles.
 
Last edited:

hwkn

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Oct 5, 2005
Messages
1,258
Location
Evanston Il
The coolest video on disc 1 was the live version of Hey Jude with David Frost introducing the performance[i'd never seen that version before last night]......the audio and the video on disc 1 was pretty good[I gave it a 10.....I felt someone had to].
 

JonUrban

Forum Curmudgeon
Staff member
Since 2002/2003
Joined
Mar 2, 2002
Messages
15,952
Location
Connecticut
Comon boys, stay title specific. General comments about polls, voting, etc., don't belong here.
 

dr. simple

1K Club - QQ Shooting Star
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Messages
1,400
Location
Ohio
I'm going to explain my vote of "4".

I love the Beatles, and the content is and always will be, in my opinion, a "10".

This is an audio forum, so I'm not going to discuss the video content. I don't pay much attention to the quality of video, so I don't base my votes on video. Maybe it's nice, maybe it's not - I don't know, and I don't care. I bought my blu ray player because I wanted to hear Tom Petty and all the blu ray audio discs that followed.

This is a multichannel forum, and this disc is a non-event. We all could do better with the original CDs in PLII, and those of you with more sophisticated surround synthesizers could do much better. This "mix" was a complete waste of any effort that the creators put into it.

I try to keep my negative opinions to myself here and on other social media, but I am so disappointed with this I can't be silent.
 
2
Top