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.
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
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
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?
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.
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.
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?
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.
Welcome to my world, many reissues are dull, bloated, lifeless, I have done the same comparison with my UK 1st press and the mono box version, the difference to me on my equipment is night and day, wait till you hear a UK 1st press Sgt Pepper, or Help etc, as for the half speed masters don't make me laugh
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.
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!
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.
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.
A surprise to my ears in the same way. My foreboding is now confirmed by you. How the virgin comes to the child. So I am the happy owner of a Mono original revolver Edition. In top condition. My ears and my brain are happy. My good hunting instinct like that of a bitch. Now wait for the upcoming new revolver. We will hear. With you Michael. :-) ❤️Heike Very informative background knowledge. The Matrix Link is of paramount importance.👌 Thanks.
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.
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!
This is largely an artificially created hype. If you listen to Day Tripper/We Can Work It Out in stereo US, you won't want the mono versions anymore. Many Beatles albums sound better in stereo. And if you don't like wide panning, there's an equalizer for that.
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.
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
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
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.
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.
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.
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!
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.
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.
Both mono and stereo boxes are only suitable for listening and replacing with new ones. They have no real collectible value and are not at all similar to the first presses. I don't understand who is raising the prices on them. Ordinary consumer goods, not the Grail. The images are blurry, the cardboard is slightly glossy and bears little resemblance to the chic laminate of the old days. At the same time, it also seems to be a little sticky. Only books are good. I have this shit, but at starting prices. I would never forgive myself for buying this garbage at the current fantastic prices. Yes, it's new, strong, acceptable, sealed... junk - in an oversized box. This is why I don't recommend buying vinyl boxes. It's better to spend money on the individual albums you need. But it's even better to find old records in good condition.
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.
I just broke the protection sleeve of the box….how much could be the value loss? I payed 1600€ for it. Its mint apart from the exterior sleeve, the one explaining what is the content of the box. Thanks!!!!!!!!!
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.
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
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.
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 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.
I’ve never been the biggest fan of Stereo. Stereo is really cool when you play Disco or Club music. I do have a Beatles Mono compilation I bought a few years ago. I paid about $80.00 dollars for it. But, I never opened it. It’s like 3 or 4 LP’s with a lot of their hits. Anyone know about this compilation?
How much did you pay for the 1st press? Sorry if i missed it but its also important. As the price of these special editions is getting pushed up more and more (150 for Steely Dan!!!! FFS) it is also having an effect on the used market. Sold prices on Ebay range form 70 to 250 GBP a pop.
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).
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 UA-cam "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!
Michael its me again.... I hope for your comparison when you played the new Beatles in mono that you used a mono cartridge with an ELLIPTICAL diamond instead of a cartridge with a SPHERICAL one as they were meant for playing original mono recordings... So you will not get the proper sound if you used a mono suitable for older pressings.... Please try with an ELLIPTICAL mono diamond.....
I only have a couple US Capitol versions and I'm not impressed with them. They sound harsh to me. I wish they were offering a single mono LP repress like they are with the stereo remix. I don't really want to but the deluxe set just to get it. I did recently get a Rubber Soul mono repress from 1981 on Parlophone and its really great.
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.
if they could get the mastering on my 1984 Frank Sinatra capitol box set so right why cant they get the Beatles right. I own the mono set,and its a mixed bag at best
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
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.
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.
@@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... 😅
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.
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 !!👏
michael! if you haven't already, you definitely have to watch this video about the 2014 mono box. this youtube channel is an amazing resource for beatles related vinyl studies: ua-cam.com/video/uZJnsy34uD8/v-deo.html&ab_channel=ParlogramAuctions . With that said, I'm totally with you on this. Whatever the wave forms suggest in that interesting video, and volume adjusted, there's simply a liveliness, a presence in the originals that isn't the same in the 2014s that I have. The OGs feel here and now. We can't forget the Beatles are a rock 'n' roll band! I'll be curious to see how the other match ups compare to you on your system. Thank you for your work in doing these comparisons!
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.
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 ?
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 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
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.
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? 👍👍
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?
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.
@@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!
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.
I disliked the Revolver mono reissue so much that it came off my turntable and straight onto eBay - sold for the normal retail price that I paid for it. I have never heard an original Revolver mono. Curiously, one of the claims made in favour of the reissues is that, "back in the day" (as they say), originals will have been mastered with low quality equipment in mind (the audience mostly being young people, not audiophiles) and certainly advanced stylus profiles were not around. According to this logic (as I understand the argument), a present-day listener utilising good equipment/stylus profile ought to expect to be disappointed - hearing a horrid tonal mismatch between the '60s mastering limitations and the 'hi-fidelity' of the modern playback system. Yet so often - the argument seems not to hold! Is it due to the freshness of the tape? Skillset in the original cutting in spite of the historical constraints? Happy accident? Placebo effect? PS. Get well soon, Michael!
Me too. I read your review on discogs and it mirrored my thoughts exactly. I even mentioned this on the Hoffman forum but I got the impression that many weren’t keen to agree with me. I thought Rubber Soul and Sgt Pepper were pretty good though…but Revolver was poor imo…
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 😊
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. ✌️
@@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.
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.
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.
I have all the mono 2014 cuts, and while they do sound great they are definitely overrated and should not be selling at the prices that they’re going for.
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 !
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 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’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.
@@Michael45RPM Great, can't wait! BTW, for shipping from US, have you tried any of the logistic companies? I have very good experience with Polonez Parcel Service. They can aggregate multiple packages (e.g. multiple orders) into one and all sorts of other services (including taking picture before sending). And the ship to Germany. Cheers
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.
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.
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....
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!
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.
I've got all the 2014 monos except for MMT, I'd describe them as 'nice, but nothing special!' - Help! sounds the worst of all and it's the one I wanted the most. Apparently the original mono was the same though.
The first side of Help! always sounded "rough" in mono. Any original (pre-1988) stereo UK copy will better it as sound.If a UKcopy has any reference to "Direct Metal Mastering" pass on it with speed as that's that awful digital remix.
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..
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.
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 -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
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
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?
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.
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?
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?
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.
Welcome to my world, many reissues are dull, bloated, lifeless, I have done the same comparison with my UK 1st press and the mono box version, the difference to me on my equipment is night and day, wait till you hear a UK 1st press Sgt Pepper, or Help etc, as for the half speed masters don't make me laugh
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.
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!
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.
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.
A surprise to my ears in the same way.
My foreboding is now confirmed by you.
How the virgin comes to the child.
So I am the happy owner of a Mono original revolver Edition.
In top condition.
My ears and my brain are happy.
My good hunting instinct like that of a bitch.
Now wait for the upcoming new revolver.
We will hear.
With you Michael. :-)
❤️Heike
Very informative background knowledge.
The Matrix Link is of paramount importance.👌
Thanks.
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.
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!
This is largely an artificially created hype. If you listen to Day Tripper/We Can Work It Out in stereo US, you won't want the mono versions anymore. Many Beatles albums sound better in stereo. And if you don't like wide panning, there's an equalizer for that.
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.
I prefer the 1982 Japanese Red Wax over both the original and the 2014.
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
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
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.
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.
Originals always win. Something to be said for fresh tapes when they were made. Makes all the difference.
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.
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!
Amazing video Michael. I sense your excitement and delight. I feel like jumping on a plane to Germany just to hear it 😂
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.
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.
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.
Both mono and stereo boxes are only suitable for listening and replacing with new ones. They have no real collectible value and are not at all similar to the first presses. I don't understand who is raising the prices on them. Ordinary consumer goods, not the Grail. The images are blurry, the cardboard is slightly glossy and bears little resemblance to the chic laminate of the old days. At the same time, it also seems to be a little sticky. Only books are good. I have this shit, but at starting prices. I would never forgive myself for buying this garbage at the current fantastic prices. Yes, it's new, strong, acceptable, sealed... junk - in an oversized box. This is why I don't recommend buying vinyl boxes. It's better to spend money on the individual albums you need. But it's even better to find old records in good condition.
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.
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.
I just broke the protection sleeve of the box….how much could be the value loss? I payed 1600€ for it. Its mint apart from the exterior sleeve, the one explaining what is the content of the box.
Thanks!!!!!!!!!
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.
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
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.
Makes me want to get my ‘78 version out and have a listen. It’s been years 👍😎
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 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.
I’ve never been the biggest fan of Stereo. Stereo is really cool when you play Disco or Club music. I do have a Beatles Mono compilation I bought a few years ago. I paid about $80.00 dollars for it. But, I never opened it. It’s like 3 or 4 LP’s with a lot of their hits. Anyone know about this compilation?
How much did you pay for the 1st press? Sorry if i missed it but its also important. As the price of these special editions is getting pushed up more and more (150 for Steely Dan!!!! FFS) it is also having an effect on the used market. Sold prices on Ebay range form 70 to 250 GBP a pop.
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. 😁🙄
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).
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 UA-cam "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!
Michael its me again.... I hope for your comparison when you played the new Beatles in mono that you used a mono cartridge with an ELLIPTICAL diamond instead of a cartridge with a SPHERICAL one as they were meant for playing original mono recordings... So you will not get the proper sound if you used a mono suitable for older pressings.... Please try with an ELLIPTICAL mono diamond.....
I only have a couple US Capitol versions and I'm not impressed with them. They sound harsh to me. I wish they were offering a single mono LP repress like they are with the stereo remix. I don't really want to but the deluxe set just to get it. I did recently get a Rubber Soul mono repress from 1981 on Parlophone and its really great.
Weird or surprising findings. I have the 2014 and the 1st correct UK press. They sound very similar to me.
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.
if they could get the mastering on my 1984 Frank Sinatra capitol box set so right why cant they get the Beatles right. I own the mono set,and its a mixed bag at best
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
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.
Why would anyone who was there from the beginning, and I was in the Fan Club, want these. No thanks.
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... 😅
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.
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 !!👏
The mono’s were probably mostly played on box record players. While the stereo’s were on a turntable.
michael! if you haven't already, you definitely have to watch this video about the 2014 mono box. this youtube channel is an amazing resource for beatles related vinyl studies: ua-cam.com/video/uZJnsy34uD8/v-deo.html&ab_channel=ParlogramAuctions . With that said, I'm totally with you on this. Whatever the wave forms suggest in that interesting video, and volume adjusted, there's simply a liveliness, a presence in the originals that isn't the same in the 2014s that I have. The OGs feel here and now. We can't forget the Beatles are a rock 'n' roll band! I'll be curious to see how the other match ups compare to you on your system. Thank you for your work in doing these comparisons!
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.
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 ?
Great review on your video for Revolver. I have always wondered how long It took Klaus to sketch and ink the front cover.
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 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
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.
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? 👍👍
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
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.
when will they REISSUE the mono box set!?!? 🙏🏻
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.
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!
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.
Another great video Michael, thank you. Fantastic.
Phenomenal 30 000 followers. 🍀
You more than deserve it.
My sympathy and happiness for you and your channel.
Congratulation.
❤️Heike
I disliked the Revolver mono reissue so much that it came off my turntable and straight onto eBay - sold for the normal retail price that I paid for it.
I have never heard an original Revolver mono.
Curiously, one of the claims made in favour of the reissues is that, "back in the day" (as they say), originals will have been mastered with low quality equipment in mind (the audience mostly being young people, not audiophiles) and certainly advanced stylus profiles were not around. According to this logic (as I understand the argument), a present-day listener utilising good equipment/stylus profile ought to expect to be disappointed - hearing a horrid tonal mismatch between the '60s mastering limitations and the 'hi-fidelity' of the modern playback system.
Yet so often - the argument seems not to hold! Is it due to the freshness of the tape? Skillset in the original cutting in spite of the historical constraints? Happy accident? Placebo effect?
PS. Get well soon, Michael!
SPOT ON Jon!!!!!!
Me too. I read your review on discogs and it mirrored my thoughts exactly. I even mentioned this on the Hoffman forum but I got the impression that many weren’t keen to agree with me. I thought Rubber Soul and Sgt Pepper were pretty good though…but Revolver was poor imo…
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 😊
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
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
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!
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.
NIGTH AND DAY?! You must have had A HARD DAYS NIGHT
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.
I have all the mono 2014 cuts, and while they do sound great they are definitely overrated and should not be selling at the prices that they’re going for.
Agree 👍
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 !
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 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’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.
Hi Michael, thanks for the great video. Can you share the contact to your magical London friend who gets the records for you? Thanks
i am working on that... cool things might happen Ondrej :-)
@@Michael45RPM Great, can't wait! BTW, for shipping from US, have you tried any of the logistic companies? I have very good experience with Polonez Parcel Service. They can aggregate multiple packages (e.g. multiple orders) into one and all sorts of other services (including taking picture before sending). And the ship to Germany. Cheers
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.
Miss your video's my friend. This is the longest sabadical in a while. Look forward to the next one!
I agree with you. Never had that cut but the -1/-2 is better
You all underestimate how much 40-50 year old tapes loose! They loose a lot. No matter if it‘s AAA. Unfortunately
what makes you so sure? interesting aspect as i heard differently
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.
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.
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....
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!
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
I've got all the 2014 monos except for MMT, I'd describe them as 'nice, but nothing special!' - Help! sounds the worst of all and it's the one I wanted the most. Apparently the original mono was the same though.
The first side of Help! always sounded "rough" in mono. Any original (pre-1988) stereo UK copy will better it as sound.If a UKcopy has any reference to "Direct Metal Mastering" pass on it with speed as that's that awful digital remix.
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..
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.
Its also interesting to do this on The Stones Mono box. Thanks Michael for this video.
I will do that Erik