Why do the new 2009 Beatles CDs sound so good?


It seems a small (maybe big) miracle what they've done with the Beatles 9/9/09 cd box. These were always piercing and grainy (since 1987), and now they are just about the best CDs I have (and this includes SACDs). If it can be done here, it seems like this could be done with other popular music discs.
It seems that the problems in digital are not in the medium itself, but the way the recordings are made.
Companies like DCC and MFSL tried to improve things, but the Beatles box seems to surpass these by far.
A lot of people are quick to criticize digital vs. vinyl, but, to my ears, the Beatles now sound better than vinyl ever did. Anyway, if anyone could shed light on how this was accomplished, I'd be curious.
rgs92
I just bought, on a lark, the Beatles "Rubber Soul" newly remastered CD... what was surprising to me, was the liner note stating this remastering was based on digital transfers made back in 1987 by George Martin (I think).
Well to me, this disc sounds really good. And I am wondering, why was this remastered from what would seem to me to be a very early digital transfer of imformation (1987)?? Why weren't these new remasters made from original analog tapes, digitally transferred now with the latest digital levels (you know, 24 bit 196 whatever)...
No matter, the sound is very good to me. I'm sure an original British Mono LP mint pressing would sound better but this is one good sounding CD.
I have to agree ... I bought Abbey Road and was so impressed that I went out and bought nearly all the remaining stereo remasters (should have bought the box set). Costco had them for $10 ea. I enjoyed them for a couple months and then after reading more reviews dumped a small fortune on the mono box set. I was very happy with that as well. Maybe there is still hope for some of the old classics? The Zeppelin remastered box set was very, very good as well.
They are well done and a lot louder overall which creates a totally different presentation that keeps your attention better.

I think the Beatles remasters are the prime example of newer recordings that fly in the face of the mantra often heard that all newer loudness wars CDs are bad recordings. many are, but many are not. Nothing new under the sun there.....
If CDs had sounded this good from the beginning, I wouldn't have so much vinyl.
I still buy used vinyl for cost effectiveness in listening to a lot of new music for not much, but seldom pay more than $1-$5 for used vinyl in good condition.

I'll go higher occasionally for old stuff on vinyl I have to have that is not available with good CD quality but that's about it.

80% of my vinyl collection was acquired BCD (before CDs, in the early 80s or earlier).

I bought a nice Linn turntable back then in that I did not want to have to replace all my vinyl with CDs (expensive) to have good sound. That was one of the best audio investments I have ever made. The Linn is still going strong and sounds better than ever in my current rig.

I hope to convert some of my vinyl to digital music server files gradually over time, but that is still a time consuming process that I have little time for.