The Beatles Revolver

It reminds me of the Kinks. Ray Davies always said he hated stereo and did not know how to use it. 

At the time of Revolver and before (and maybe even after) the Beatles mostly left the mixing to others.

Even though I listened to the original stereo mixes for years, I mostly love Giles' remixes of the 1967-1968 material, and I bet the Beatles would, too.  He does things like separating instruments or voices that were originally mixed together so you can hear the timbre and lines of each more clearly, and it adds power to a song like "Birthday" when the guitars are hard panned rather than sharing the same channel.

I forget about audiophile notions of hearing musicians in a space when I listen to most rock music from this period.  I just accept that the mix is a work of art in itself. However, I don't like it when a drum set is panned unrealistically wide--a problem even in newer jazz recordings as well as classic rock recordings.

I bought the other three and I’ll buy Revolver when it comes out.
 

Nuff said.

What he did with Beatles at the Hollywood Bowl is a game changer. But lots of liberties were taken. Small parts weren’t from the actual live recording. I own it...I love it. You can hear how hard Ringo hits.

His Abbey Road reissue sounds great and punchy and you do hear things not before heard but it does sound like a modern interpretation as someone earlier in this thread put it.

In the end I prefer the original recording. It has stood against another previous reissue as well. Something is gained but no doubt something is lost. I can’t put my finger on it but there it is.

ANYTHING released from Beatles, Stones and a few select others is simply

TIRED, BORING and a money grab for whoever decides it's time for a new "super" release.

Spend the money on a minty first press-at least that's got SOME kind of intrinsic value. Play it once to put it on you NAS setup or CD. Now you can enjoy endless perfect LP sound along with an album that will be worth $10 bucks more in 50 years.