2. music
  3. 1251672347

How to listen to the Beatles re-releases?

There have been some stupid questions asked on these forums over the years, and several of those stupid questions have come from me. Perhaps here's another one for the ages...

I'm 38 and have never really listened to the Beatles catalog. I own "Peppers", "Rubber Soul" and "Abby Road" on vinyl, plus "Love", but wouldn't say I'm as familiar with their body of work as I am with, say, R.E.M (they were "my" band during my high-school and college years).

However, I've pre-ordered both the stereo and mono Beatles re-releases. What's the best way to re-introduce myself to the genius of the "fab four"?

Should I sit down and work my way through their collection chronologically? Is there a good companion book to read through while I listen? Should I listen to an album over-and-over until I really "get it" before moving on to the next? Both mono and stereo?

There are albums that I pick up and think "Wow...It would have been awesome to listen to this the first day it was released." Fleetwood Mac's "Rumors". CCR's "Willy...". Rush's "Moving Pictures". Etc. The excitement of the release. The cultural and musical context. The significance. I'll never be able to experience that with the Beatles, and I'd like to put myself in a place (mentally) to really listen to the Beatles for the first time (again).

Does this make sense? Blast away. I figure I couple of people will understand what I'm asking and have some thoughtful suggestions.
128x128nrenter
ozzy's avatar
ozzy
3,650 posts
 
I feel the Stereo versions have minimal differences between these new recordings and the older ones.
The one area improved is that the bass is better defined.
cyclonicman
693 posts
 
Jim, There is no comparison! The new remastered version overshadows the 87 pressing in every imaginable way. The remastered version has greater body overall. The bass is more enhanced and unmuddied. The vocals are more transparent, you just hear all of the music. Ringo's drums are more prevalent than before. The pace of the music even sounds more rhythmic. I can't explain it better than to say that it sounds more like vinyl than anything that I have heard before. What I found amazing is that one doesn't have to make an effort to notice the changes. By the time I listened to Think for yourself, I stopped analyzing and started listening to the music. You have to hear it for yourself!!
macdadtexas
1,794 posts
 
I can't believe anyone would even argue the greatness of the Beatles? You can say you don't like them, but you put your ignorance on display if you don't acknowledge their absolute greatness, beyond compare.

You cannot compare the Beatles to any other rock band. You can compare them to Wolfgang Amedeus Mozart, Ludwig Van Beethoven, George Gershwin, but don't throw out the Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin or Elvis, their not in the same league.

400 yrs from now people will still love the Beatles and all the words to their songs as we, even though it is subconscience, know all the works of Mozart. They are that important to Western (and far eastern Japan, Vietnam, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, the Phillipines) culture.

I will say that the Beatles are NOT my favorite band. But I will agree they are the most important band EVER. There is not any question of that. There would be no Black Sabbath, Led Zeppelin(my Favorite), Elton John, Artic Monkey, Oasis (especially Oasis), Fleetwood Mac, heck even Metallica without the Beatles.

jimjoyce25
215 posts
 
Well, between Ozzy and Cyclonicman, it sounds like we have divergent opinions already.
dcrugby
96 posts
 
i can hear chashmal in a previous life, 20,000 years ago in a cave in southwestern france...

"meh. the proportions of that bull are way off."
More to discover