Do you plan to buy The Beatles CD remasters?

And if so, will you be going for the stereo or the mono? The release is close enough now -- 09/09/09 -- that I'm starting to get pretty excited about this -- though I'm really not sure which to get. Maybe both? Nah, that would be awfully excessive, wouldn't it? But, we are talking about The Beatles, after all, so maybe ...
What are your thoughts?
No. I have Beatles vinyl I bought back in the '60's when I was a kid. It's in good condition and I have a respectable turntable, so there's no need to buy it again in CD format. If I want convenience, I'll just rip it into my computer from the vinyl.
NO..I too have all the beatles vinyl from my youth in the 60's and all only played once..
As Vanila Ice said (Just Dupe It)if needed to CD
Of course if you don't have all the original Vinyl then it would be a go.
Like the other posters, I have the original Capitol rainbow, Parlophone, and Apple releases so my interest is minimal.

Abbey Road may be a consideration as I collect different copies/versions of that album/cd.

It appears this may be a great opportunity for those who don't have the original Capitol/Apple/Parlophone releases.

However, the recordings are sonically quite average up to Rubber Soul; there's just not a lot there to remaster IMO.
I plan to buy a few and see if they're truly superior to existing versions. The new remasters of the first four British albums can't NOT be better, but I have good-sounding versions of some of the later ones, i.e. Japanese pressings, special editions, and even two of the original CD issues ("Help" and "Rubber Soul" were both ADD and sound pretty good).
Post removed 
The stereo versions of the early albums had the vocals in one channel and the instruments in the other, so I think the mono versions of these albums would be preferable.

Does anyone know which albums were mixed in this way (vocals one channel, instruments the other)?
The issue with the first few channeled stereo albums, voices on one side instruments on the other was hopefully corrected with this remaster like it was on the Love album.
If not than it is not worth purchasing them especially at these prices.
As for the bass issue on the U.S. & Japanese releases. MOFI tried to correct the problem and most say they destroyed the albums. The UK releases sound best to me but the cost is getting out of hand.
We all know who is going to to say they suck, hot stampers and or the origials are best @ 250.00 and up a pop.
I enjoy all my differant releases of the Beatles music even my MOFI's.
This is all IMHO.
When I have money to burn, and no other records I want. It's another matter if they are ever released on vinyl. I'm not sure I see the point, on RBCD.
It will be interesting to see how these turn out. The originals were (are) somewhat of a disaster as have been most of the re-issues over the years. The Japanese vinyl has been pretty inconsistent through all of their reissues. The MFSL vinyl has always topped my list for "audiophile" quality. I may buy one or two to start and hope for the best.
"NO..I too have all the beatles vinyl from my youth in the 60's and all only played once.."

Give me a break. You must not like the music too much if they have only been payed once.

Its interesting reading these "holier than thou" postings from the vinyl owners. I happen to have them in various forms of vinyl also but plan on buying the CDs to hear if they are better. How would any of you not buying know that what you have sounds better than something not yet released? Psychic?
Well, CD's sound like crap after listening to vinyl. I had become accustomed to CD's over the years, and still love SACD, but dude, after listening to vinyl again, I was hooked. The best CD playback I have heard, compared to a moderate vinyl rig, is truly lacking.
i'll get the stereo and mono sets too.gotta do it, its the beatles law i've lived by since 1964.
First, I'm kinda mad that they took so long to remaster this material. Let's hope they didn't botch it.

I have everything on vinyl, but I lost my 70s UK pressing of [i]Revolver[/i] and the current pressing is nasty. Also, I've only ever had a Capitol [i]Rubber Soul[/i]. So I may replace those. Perhaps I'll also try a mono SPLHCB, but that may take some getting used to after listening to the stereo my whole life.
"Give me a break. You must not like the music too much if they have only been payed once."

It's not at all unusual for vinyl collectors to have multiple copies and multiple pressings. So he very well may have copies he listens to regularly and backup copies he's saving, or may have backed them up on to CD.

We vinyl collectors do tend to go on about our "children", and I suppose it can be tiresome to non-collectors.
Thank You hit the nail on the head,I didn't want to get into that negative something mentality.

Hey Fenderny!!!What Daverz said....and up yours and the music you listen to....

We had a lot of cool (up yours sayings) in the 60's...

WOW!!I just had a rush about heading to Woodstock in 1969 in my 63 Ford Falcon...AAAAAAAH the 60's!!
I read somewhere that the new mono's will not use excessive, or perhaps any?, compression, helping to preserve the dynamics of the recordings. Can any one confirm that this is the case?
Hey smug vinyl lovers. I am too a vinyl lover. I have 3-4 copies of every Beatle album on various issues of vinyl.

The point is, get your head out of your you know what and stop the cliche filled BS. We all know vinyl CAN be better than CD. Bit until you hear the remasters please don't act like you KNOW what you have is better.

Listen to yourselfs....
No. I have never liked the Beatles. I am not really a melody kind of person. I like music with some rhythmic complexity to it rather than simply a cute ditty.
Absolutely!! I kind of wish that the release dates were staggered only because I know I am going to purchase them all. Just want to say that it scares me when people that supposedly have an ear for music say they don't like the Beatles music.
"cute ditty"

Wow, so sophisticated....

Please don't be offended. The Beatles were fantatsic at melodies that you just can't get out of your head. It is great stuff. Just not my thing that is all.

I like strange stuff like this
I am very excited about the Mono mixes. Despite what anyone says, this is how the music was originally mixed and played back at Abbey Road by the recording crews for the Beatles. Think of those mono mixes as the motherlode. Not a lot of time was taken for the stereo mixes back in the day, at was an afterthought by the engineers, which is why they have been in their less than pristine state since 1983. Having heard Rain live in Las Vegas, the sonic quality can be stunning, especially the 1966 to 1969 material. I think the Mono mixes are the way to go.
Post removed 
The mono set doesn't have Abbey Road, Let it Be, and Yellow submarine which were only recorded in stereo. It's kind of strange that Amazon has a higher pricing for the mono versions vs the stereo versions.
The early mono albums were mixed down on tube-based analogue mixers and have that tubey magic that is lacking in the last stereo albums, which were mixed down on solid state equipment starting with the White Album sessions. Those later recordings lack the bloom and warmth of the earlier work. Wait until you hear the new Revolver and Rubber Soul. You can tell this today on the best vinyl copies of the original work. I have two pristine copies of Revolver and prefer the "wall of sound" mono version over "let's make the best of four tracks" stereo sound.
I am confused, are you talking about current releases or original releases?
As far as I know the mono's are original mono's and not mixed down. Even the White album has an origial mono mix and a stereo mix, after that they were all stereo.
John Lennon is on record as saying that mono was the way to listen to the albums, especially he was fond of Pepper in mono, saying, "You've never heard Pepper until you've heard it in original mono." All their albums were originally recorded in mono until the White album. They were later adapted and released in some form of stereo as the format evolved.
If Mono was the only choice, I would pass.
The Capitol Box set issued a few years back with the first 4 Albums in stereo is FAR superior to the original Mono releases.
The Capital release a few years back was the worst reissue and transfer to digital I ever heard :-) mono or stereo.
Hevac1, That is in your opinion of course.
I disagree. The first disc really sounds great!
Nice system Ozzy. Maybe they do sound good on your system. They sounded lean and edgy on mine.
I strongly agree with Hevac. I have the Parlophone and the Capitol boxed sets. The Capitol releases are horrible when compared to the original parlophone versions. Capitol deliberately butchered the American releases by adding some noise to the mixes. The Beatles were also appalled by the butchering that was done by Capitol records. I firmly believe that no system now or ever would make the Captiol versions sound better than the Parlophone versions, just not possible!

You are correct. I visited George Martin at Abbey Road in 1998 and he played me the original source tape in mono. It was fab.
Listen to " I saw her standing there" from the Capitol release's and tell me that the old Parlophone versions sounds better.
The Capitol version now has bass and dynamics.

That being said, Cyclonicman, I hope the new releases are better than the Parlophone versions. You can keep those!
Ozzy, I think we are all hoping that the remasters will finally provide us with the best fidelity available.
Lets all pray...
Perhaps there will be a SACD, DVD-A or Blu Ray release???
I'm thinking of giving the mono set a shot, then maybe some stereo versions on an individual basis. According to my understanding only 10,000 mono box sets will available.
Bongofury, wow, lucky you. I admit I'm jealous as hell that you had that experience with George Martin. Yet, congratulations it must have been fun.