Do you approve of people remixing old albums? Are people going

If the mixing is shit originally, then yes

File: 1495954234703.jpg (1MB, 1242x1744px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1242x1744px

Reminder

File: 05.jpg (40KB, 480x285px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 480x285px

>>73065362
Do you also approve of this?

>>73065339
Sgt. Pepper desperately needed a remix and so does most of The Beatles' catalog. In this case I would say it's justified, but if the mixing on the albums being remixed were already decent enough then it probably doesn't need to be done. A lot of music from the 60's and earlier was produced primarily in mono, which isn't the industry standard anymore and the stereo versions were lazily thrown together, so you could make a case for remixing a lot of older mono albums into updated stereo versions.

>>73065433
No, that diminishes from what made the original good
What I mean is, take for example Raw Power. If they were to make a remix of that which improved the production quality over either the Bowie or Iggy mixes of it, I would have no problem as that as it could only serve to improve the listenability of the product.

>>73065533
It's just the rights owners squeezing out even more money out of the albums.

>>73065665
That may be true that they do it for more money, but if it results in a better product then who gives a fuck?

>>73065665
if people want it and will buy it there's nothing wrong with that lol

>>73065433
That's completely irrelevant, it's more like a movie going from VHS to Blu-Ray

File: 1496104071534.jpg (38KB, 657x527px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 657x527px

I consider sgt pepper to be an exception because it was meant to be the state of the art at the time and >IT TOOK 700 HOURS TO MAKE

so it totally fits with the sound and the aim and everything that anyone who was part of or like the beatles wants. hence zero objections from literally anyone to this new mix

but like take Velvet Underground & Nico for instance, from the same year. being a little rough around the edges is definitely part of the experience and TBPH despite the lower fidelity recording it's a work that sounds a lot less dated than sgt pepper

>>73065397
The next logical step would be the 2014 mono remaster

mono > new stereo > original stereo

>>73065589
You're an idiot. One piece of art existing doesn't "take away" from another piece of art. You will have all of these versions of the same album available. Just because it "diminishes" the original for you doesn't mean it doesn't enhance those albums for many other people. One isn't replacing the other! Music isn't a competition and it can all exist together.

The new mix is good. I'm not sure if I like it better than the old one, which I never had much of a problem with. I tend to only have opinions on these things if I've listened to them like 300 times like Skylarking.