9 9 9 - THE BEATLES

09 Sept 09 - A cynical excuse to squeeze yet more money out of a back catalogue that has become legendary, a chance to raise more funds to allow Paul McCartney to keep his hair nice and brown, an attempt by EMI to prop up their troubled finances - hardly...the Beatle Remasters are a long overdue clean up and crystal clear representation of this, the most important song catalogue of the twentieth century.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion but anyone who says, as some do, that the band are overrated...well, that's not an opinion, that's just plain wrong. They may not be too everyone's tastes and their omniscience may annoy some people but there is no doubting their importance in the field of popular music.

I'm one of those Beatle nuts and I had to rush out this morning and buy all of the remasters - which maybe makes this the fourth or fifth time I've bought the albums - first I had a few on vinyl back in the Eighties, then I got them all on CD and have replaced those CD's several times and now the Remasters.

The original (British) versions of the twelve albums were first released on CD in 1987; they sounded thin and bright, without a hint of the LPs' analog warmth. It was hardly an auspicious beginning for the digital Beatles music.

Are they worth it? Are they significantly better quality than the original CD issues?

Yep - Take Long Long Long on the White Album - the previous CD's have mangled this song and hidden George's wistful vocal away in the music. I never liked this song - merely because I'd only ever heard it on the cassette and original CD, but at the same time I've always had the suspicion that there was a beautiful song hidden away waiting to get out. The remastered version now brings the vocals out of the mix and no longer do they have to compete with the backing track. Now the voice intertwines with the instruments and the song sounds significantly better. And the guitar intro on Day Tripper (Past Masters) positively pulses. Rubber Soul's acoustics really ring out on the new CD's and the bass line in Michelle has never sounded better.

Each CD also contains a mini documentary though these are only playable through a computer and the packaging of each album is welcome. Inlay booklets contain the original cover notes as well as newly written essays about the original recording process. Sgt. Peppers contains an introduction from Paul McCartney in which he claims the name came from him mishearing the words, "salt and pepper" as Sgt. Peppers. As I write Past Masters is playing in the background and I've just heard the echo on Thank you girl - I must have heard this song zillions of times but this is the first time I've actually heard this echoing behind the main vocal. Mind you as good as the new White Album is Revolution No 9 is still a ridiculous indulgence by a zonked out John...though it is crystal clear this time.

Fans have been waiting 22 years for these remasters - ever since the inferior CD transfers were released back in 1987, a whole generation has been listening to The Beatles without experiencing the true sound. Though it's not all positive - I do think the mono cuts should have been available on each CD as well as the stereo, and it does seem to be a cynical moneymaking plan to release two versions of each album - stereo and mono. Still, Beatle nut I may be but I'm not buying each album twice.

Uncut Magazine, probably the UK's most respected music magazine, said of the remasters: "It’s a weird thing to say, but Apple’s frustrating procrastination has turned out to be a lifesaver for these albums. Remastered by a small team of Abbey Road engineers over a four-year period, the CDs have not been brickwalled or over-compressed (unlike the 2000 compilation 1, which sounds unpleasantly ‘glassy’ in comparison), and nor do they even sound particularly loud (unless you turn them up). The two that have been restored to the point of miraculousness and beyond, The White Album and Abbey Road, are the ones I’d recommend first to people on limited budgets. Abbey Road’s Long Medley is simply a breathtaking musical tapestry. When it has to rock, it rocks. When it needs to be subtle (there is much more to the transition between “You Never Give Your Money” and “Sun King” than we previously thought), it has a warm, heavenly glow. History rewritten? No – history written honestly, truthfully, transparently, exhilaratingly, with no omissions or obfuscations. The Beatles up-close and personal. With blisters on their fingers."


If Uncut says so you know it must be so - but I'm pleased with the new remasters and apart from the omission of both mono and stereo on each one I don't think they could be better. Now please let's leave it at this - I can't afford to keep buying the same stuff over and over

With many of these songs now gaining much radio airplay , and the kids getting into the Beatles Rock Star game (also out today), it will be amusing to see kids, scratching their heads and thinking - these guys sound so much like Oasis! But then the warring Mancs are not the only one's who built their entire oeuvre on the Beatles Sound - The Bee Gees took the This Boy harmonies and ran with them, ELO built every song on the foundations of I am the Walrus, heavy metal bands from Metallica to ACDC owe much to songs like Helter Skelter, Revolution 1 and Yer Blues. Kula Shaka are George Harrison x 4 and the Stone Roses guitar style is the Beatles filtered through acid house influences.



I'll shut up now and take my Beatle obsession with me...I think I'll go and listen to a REMASTERED album.