What Giles Martin discovered when remixing Revolver 

Best quote of the interview...........

Quick add that to the all time quote list! So true! : ))

That is so profound!

Hardly a surprising attitude from a guy still copping a a good living off his dad's work with the band, I guess. I enjoy the Beatles as much as anyone else, but not to the point where I need every re-mix and re-master that has ever been and ever will be. There's only so much that can be done because of the original recording techniques. I love the 'new' single 'Now and Then,' but do I need another copy of the red or blue albums just because Apple Records wants to shift a few more copies by re-releasing them with the 'new' single on them? Nope. My teen years were the 80's so I missed the Beatles as an active band by a long shot. I only got into them in recent years. Perhaps this generation's teens and twenties are the target audience for new editions of the red and blue albums. Fair enough, I suppose.

@@CloudiVist Nothing to do with the fact he grew up with the Beatles music and his Dad and HAS TALENT and is good at what he does and is in a unique position to serve the cause for musical excellence..... Quite a large number of people follow their father's profession... He might have chosen to be a doctor or a fireman ... Sometimes people just have the love and the interest and passion and the talent for it. What a horrendous cynical pointless sad attitude.. You Tube is really full of jealousy and despair and cynicism and put downs on people... as if the whole world is some kind of conspiracy for people's lack of success or something...... You can't say it in society so people vent it You Tube as if we are all interested in their moot point of narcissism... I suggest we stomp it out from the web. Giles is decent , and talented like his father was literally born to it and he has insights that all few others have of his generation.. it is a blessing really and his eyes grew up with the vinyl the CD the master tapes and all else..he is ideally suited for the task and a genuine Beatles fan. Actually, find your comment unworthy to make really. how cynical an attitude is that...I am actually quite appalled on a ahem human level.

Me too. The interesting part to me, is that, beyond all the hype is that these were 4 amazing musicians, who knew how to work together towards the common goal of the music. They were not interested in the rest of it - the fame etc. - once they had it. This sort of project is to illustrate that musicianship at the heart of their songs: it isn't about how many notes you can play, but how you fit into the song.

The last records made by the original four Beatles.

Rookie writer to New York magazine publisher: How much do you pay for a thousand words? Editor: It depends on what words, and in what order. The Beatles had the right words and right notes in the right order.@@phoffen3829

@@phoffen3829 What also was an influence these four guys were at the right place at the right time, and a post worldwar changing world throwing aside rusted conventions.

Those 2 are my favorite, too. For me, it's because you got to hear these 4 brilliant musicians and composers at their peak, without and before the super-production of Sgt Pepper.

I remember the very first time I heard it - bought on release, in the Sixties, as a RECORD, of course, loving that opening distorted count-in to "Taxman!" The sound of the studio! Wow! Loved it!

Nothing today compares.

@@fiddleandfart ABSOLUTE genius!!!!!...and probably their BEST album!!!

@@456zounds "Yeah, yeah, YEAH" are the first words out of my mouth...(no pun intended, but I am inadvertently saying the chorus to 'She Loves You'... I am too much of a The Beatles nerd!!). "Rubber Soul" is just as good and even better, but not quite as good (if that makes any sense)

I was going to say “Sounds like it was recorded this morning”. But I think we’re on the same page. I bought the Revolver Remix, and am VERY glad I did.

Definitely the fork in the road when The Beatles took the psychedelic way!

But also the last remnants of their "Moptop" era. I feel when The Beatles changed direction, there's a definite line. Even then, sometimes there's a color bleed over the former and later boundaries.

Yeah, although many would say that "Rubber Soul" was their artistic pivot record - with "Revolver" the bridge to "Sgt Pepper" and beyond. Weren't The Beatles incredible?! All on (bounced) 4 track analogue too. So creative. And, of course, groundbreaking!

@@fiddleandfart Rubber Soul had many elements of their old "mop top" sound while still evolving, to me "Got To Get You Into My Life" is the true last shred of the early Beatles in my opinion because of its soul/motown inspiration.

That's a good way to put it. Although sometimes I think that belongs to Rubber Soul.

Yes, yes. He changed the sound.

4 tracks with many bits & bobs in the final mix.

Wasn't he responsible for Robin Trowers Bridge of Sighs?

@@allenf.5907 Yes, and his book is a real good read! ...but he changed the sound as they asked him to. I have mixed feelings about Giles Martin remixing everything because he wants to? ?...I guess Im cynical not sure why except that he's making a new "product" that can be sold again.

@@larryhudspeth4072 I think Giles does, too, to be fair

...thats a great story. thanks for sharing.

So clever!

wonderful story. Thank you.

you know that's cheating though, right? :D

@@almishti Only punishable if you get caught 😉.

I was actually hoping that everyone was wrong about revolver, and that the announcement would be rubber soul. I think I love rubber soul slightly more

and to that point, at least so far, there doesn't seem to be anyone in the comments lamenting the state of music today. and no that is not what I am saying. music today is *just fine*

Same here. Can’t wait for Rubber Soul.

U R dead Sir.

'Giles' is his name. Marc Bolan is not yours. Get things right.

I agree, the song writing itself is unquestionably inspired, but without Martin's input from the very start they may have never been allowed to explore and discover in the way they did. He took on everything they threw at him and he enabled them to realise their visons. His complete open mindedness, commanding presence when needed to rein them in, his experience with sound effects and comedy records, all the way to his knowledge of classical arrangement made him a pretty unique and crucial asset to The Beatles sound.

AMEN!!!!!!

You are right. As amazing as the Beatles were they had a little help from their friends. GM and Emerick deserve credit for their contributions.

@@Eyeluvlola I think the fact that a producer on an album is not as much the same as a producer on a movie as he is the director of a movie tends to make the whole thing confusing.

Hence why he is referred to as the 5th Beatle

How old were you? I was 8 when I got my first copy of "Revolver" 1969/70, or thereabouts. I talked my mum into buying it for me citing both "Eleanor Rigby" &… "Yellow Submarine".

@@jmad627 I'm not sure how old I was. I was only 2 when it came out. I was maybe 10 years old at most when I got my copy. My sister had the Red & Blue compilations and I was wearing them out, so my mum probably thought I should have my own Beatles record. She probably picked Revolver because Yellow Submarine seemed like a "kid's" song. Little did she know I was being turned on to psychedelic rock a few years after it went out of fashion. Eleanor Rigby was one of my favourites, too. So dramatic and so sad.

Paul Morrow To Morrow never knows. Neat

I was 12 yo when I bought "Revolver". It came after listening to my uncle´s collection of Beatles´ records. I had already listened to "Pepper´s", "Abbey Road" and "White Album", but when I put the needle on "Revolver" I was beamed up to another world and did not want to come back at all. I remember listening to it three times in a row and telling myself repeatedly "Man, this is a very good album" at every minute of music....still today I rank it as their best album ever. They were working as a band, tight on studio as they were used to be on stage.

It was the first real rock record anyone ever owned, to be fair!

Isn't it strange that what you say is what so many feel too. Rubber Soul and Revolver are my two favorite Beatles albums by a distance. No idea why. They just are. Liked the way Giles said that there was no magic bullet for why the Beatles were so good, they just were. Magic in other words. Cheers.

My feeling about Giles. Envy

Indeed! I'm probably around the same age, growing up with The Beatles (Still fabulous!), and used to play around with a 1/4" tape recorder, record tracks, and turn them upside down for reversals, or play them back simultaneously with records to get that fabled "phasing" effect, I'd picked up from Beatle records. Brilliant, and mind-blowing to do it yourself! I can't believe getting a little box of electronics to do that for you now can possibly be as satisfying as what we did back in the day! DIY analogue manipulation was a lot of fun, kids!

I wanted that tape recorder more than anything at that age. You're a lucky person.

I sure miss the 'old style' analogue tape machines.

Yes. 😆 I grew up in the 60s and had a similar little reel to reel tape recorder. My brother and I had so much fun experimenting with it.

You've got it, it's all about the ambience, I still keep an old radio because it's the only way to hear stuff on a 6" elliptical speaker hehe :)

"steam driven". Was that sarcasm?

@@TJamesBell I think it was a joke, but also implying the record player in question was of the antiquated, clunky variety - possibly one of those old radiograms which were more like large pieces of furniture, complete with polished wood, etc.... That's what I got from it, anyway!

@@papercup2517 No no - you rig it up to your kettle spout - sounds utterly brilliant! You know the way things are meant to be heard! Python humour alert...

@@ianbartle456 lol... Personally I still have an affection for the original system where a trained pony would trot round and round in circles to keep the records spinning... something about the clip-clop of its little hoofs blending with the beat of the music... If you didn't happen to own a pony, coconut shells would suffice, brought by those migrating swallows... Still, tempus fugit and here we are in the 21st century, for better or worse... :-)

im so peanut butter and jealous. i had falloutboy and Nickelback instead of jimi and the doors in my youth. that's so awesome, the energy around from all those goats crafting masterpieces concurrently. thank sweet Jesus for radiohead today or where would we be

Pet Sounds too

Doors Ist album 1967?

@@stephenellis2866 It was released in 67 but recorded in late summer of 66.

I have loved everything Giles and Sam have remixed. They are the best in the world at what they do. And hats off to Peter Jackson and his brilliant associates in New Zealand for advancing culture a big step forward!

He is George Martin’s son after all

Giles' new masters of Sgt Pepper, White, and Abbey Road have been absolutely fucking sublime. It's been a real treat listening to Beatles in Stereo without it sounding like dogshit. He's been a tremendous steward of the Beatles and his father's work and I hope he eventually remasters the entire catalogue.

Taxman - annoying guitar but not as bad as in Helter Skelter 3 Eleanor Rigby - fine song. 9 I'm Only Sleeping - Great song for repeat listening. Harrison's guitar backward works well - he conceived and created it.10 Love to You - Many Harrison songs are annoying. 3. Not all innovations are good. Here there everywhere - Sappy Paul does well this time around. 8. If he wasn't singing it would be a 9 Yellow Submarine - not into it. bored. If any other band does it, it's nothing. 3 She Said She Said - very good John. 9 And your Bird Can sing - thanks John. 9.5 For no one - good Paul song 8.5 Dr Roberts - well well well not well. John 3 I want to tell you. But I don't want to hear. 4 Got to get you into my life. Good enough 7.5 Tomorrow Never Knows - early psychedelia. Harrison helped out a bit 8.5

@Bennett Theissen because McCartney can trust George's son not to fck it up as it has been previously... The Beatles recordings are bona fide works of art in the audio domain and are ageing beautifully... They will be remixed ad infinitum or possibly after Paul and Ringo are not here, that will all stop and no one will be allowed to deconstruct any further. Just enjoy it while you can.. Any non Beatles fans can just off fck.

@Bennett Theissen No one is twisting your arm to make you buy anything. Don't want it? Don't buy it.

@Bennett Theissen You needed to buy them in the 60s there era,I wouldn't have a Giles mix for nothing,I've got all the Originals 90% Mono that's all you need

I was 8 in 1964-before that I was listening to my older siblings Chubby Checker records and older Chuck Berry . The Beatles 'blew my mind',even though that expression hadn't been invented yet.2 hundred years from now,if we haven't blown ourselves to kingdom come,there still will be people analyzing and listening to those four lads from Liverpool.

I, too was 15 in 64, and became a professional musician with a little help from my friends, the Beatles, and learned how to play bass guitar by ear 👂. Finally retired last year.

Yes, am just under your age, grew up with The Beatles, and was playing, on a whim, the Beatles Red compilation recently ('62-'66), and it remains incredible as a collection of work. One brilliant song after another. God, they were incredible. And that's without turning to the '67 onwards stuff. Literally mind-blowing in their inventiveness, and sheer joyous, even emotionally moving, brilliance! You hear "Love Me Do," "Hard Days Night," "Can't Buy Me Love, "I Wanna Hold Your Hand," "Help!" and so many more. And they're still just utterly knockout!

Should have said you were 64😁

@@Robin-cf9ts Well need & feed Him regardless.(ha-ha)

Tommy, it goes to show-2 Georges are better than one!

The acoustic-only version of I’m Only Sleeping that was on Anthology 2 is amazing. Incredible harmonies between John and Paul. They should have released that as a single.

Same age as you, Tommy, same feelings!!

Humble brag?

@@Chatta-Ortega Just a straight-up brag, tbh. What songwriter *wouldn't* brag if George Martin rated one of their songs?

@@OccamsEraserhead If that were me I would be climbing so many walls I would probably never come down. Fab (excuse the pun)

Call me obsessed, what Porsche did he have?

@@virgilrytaar9083 Not the 911, sadly. The cheaper model - the Boxter? Still the most expensive car I've ever driven though. It was a sort of blue-ish purple-ish metallic colour 8 think. Mind you I'm going back 20 years here so my memory might be off. All I know for sure is it wasn't the 911 but it was still AMAZING - and even more amazing that he loaned it to me. Like I said - very nice man. I also remember him saying the best way to break into the music industry was to have George Martin as your dad. So, funny and self-deprecating too.

Agree.

How can it not, now?

I think Rubber Soul is superior to Revolver. Just my view.

If this sells(which it will), it will happen.

@@andydixon2980 Truly hope that is the case. I have mine on pre-order for Revolver, it would be the same for any of the others but especially Rubber Soul

@@stewartcohen-jones2949 agree with you.

That's because the "stereo" was actually pre-mixed two-track mono, the intention from the outset that the finished recording would be mono: the market was mono, the promotional medium -- radio -- was mono. George Martin estimated that only about 12 per cent in the UK had stereo players. With radio FM existed before it was used, with TVs UHF existed before it was used, and record players had three speeds -- 16, 45, and 33 RPM -- but 16 was never used commercially.

Revolvers stereo mix was not “insufferable” lol. A great mix? Not so much by todays standards but still great and groundbreaking for its era. So much revisionism now that these cash grabs have come out.

I completely agree with the OP. The 1987 stereo mixes were not groundbreaking at the time. The difference between the ‘87/‘09 remaster of the Pepper stereo to the ‘17 remix is night and day. The White Album and Abbey Road had a great stereo mix originally, but the earlier no bleed through from one ear to the other stereo mix does not do these classic songs justice.

I think it's a generational thing, people who grew up with the original stereo mixes like them, and people who are more used to recent music like the Giles Martin remixes better. As is mentioned here, the original recordings were mixed for mono, and they spent a lot of time getting it right. The stereo mixes were an afterthought, and it was easy to put the vocals on the left and the drums on the right, etc. But somewhere in the mid-1960s record companies realized that they could charge more for "Stereo" recordings and started releasing BOTH Mono and Stereo LPs. My original 1964 copy of A Hard Day's Night was in Mono, and I just got used to that version. The 1987 CD release had the first 4 Beatles LPS in Mono ONLY. It wasn't until I came across an import version of A Hard Day's Night in the mid 80s that I got a chance to listen to it in Stereo. It was a Japanese pressing that I bought from the Import bin at Tower Records in San Francisco, and when I played it on my nice Stereo sound system at home I was blown away! I LOVED the Stereo version! When it became possible to digitize vinyl around 2000, I made my own CDs of that stereo version and passed it around to my friends. They were similarly amazed, and until the 2009 set was finally released, I had one of the few true stereo versions of A Hard Day's Night. Sometimes, the true separation of the tracks is really cool. For example, on Here, There, and Everywhere, Paul double-tracked his vocal, and on the 2009 CD, one vocal is on the left and the second vocal is on the right. It sounds fantastic! I will be disappointed if the October 28 edition of Revolver mixes the two vocals together and loses that great effect.

@@allthingsclassicrock It isn't a cash grab: you don't have to buy it. The "revisionism" is actually ignorance of later generations of "fans" who were born knowing it all so needn't actually know anything factual at all. Ten-fifteen years ago they were demanding that the first four LPs be released in stereo -- their defense, based on the fact that ALL vocals were recorded to one track, and ALL the vocals recorded to the other track, of that was "two channels + two ears = stereo". That was false, because the standard and intent was that the final recording would be MONO. That evolved to the "nuance" of whining based on the misuse of the term "panning" of the two tracks. They don't need to read George Martin's _All You Need is Ears_ in which he detailed how the recordings were made. Because then -- if they read at all -- they would have to reconcile the fact that "panning" would have required sounds be recorded to both tracks, and the "hole in the middle" between the two tracks, with their "stereo" claim. But that would have confused them even more because Martin also wrote of his visit to Capitol Records in the US and being blown away by THREE-track MONO. 99 per cent of the "controversy" about the actual nature of the recordings is based on ignorance + made up nonsense. So, when they don't get their way, they bash the recordings, and they bash George Martin. So much bullshit in place of the relatively succinct alternative: knowing the basic facts of how the recordings were made, instead of focusing exclusively on their imagined result.

would love a mash up with the xylophone mixed into the final product.

How can you say you were ‘never a fan?’ If you like good music, you have to love The Beatles. They were the absolute best at pop/rock music. No one comes remotely close! Not The Kinks, not The Who, not Jethro Tull, not Fairport Convention, not Squeeze, not The Waterboys, not Big Country, not The Jam, not The Libertines, not Ocean Colour Scene, not The Stone Roses, not Oasis, not The Arctic Moneys, not The Kooks, nobody!

One thing obvious in the Get Back series is how much their creativity depended upon goofing off. It was as if there was an imaginary barrier between them and the next great number one single and they poked at and taunted the barrier like matadors until they got a breakthrough. Remember, John says, 'just fill in the lyrics with whatever comes into your head and fix it later.' These techniques they had developed for teasing out a great song really worked for them and seemed like, as Giles aptly put it, "alchemy." They really were the magicians we see in that goofy scene in Magical Mystery Tour.

I deliberatelly signed up for Disney+ to watchi this documentary.As a Kiwi myself I was in awe of the work Peter Jackson did and it's great that the technology can be used to create new versions of the earlier albums. Can't wait to get a copy to listen to in my Atmos system

@@emmettmckenna4565 gotta love how people don't read or try to twist what you say on RU-vid comments. What did I ACTUALLY say? I said I was never HUGE fan. Key word there. I enjoy the Beatles, but I was more of a 70s kid. Led Zeppelin was my favorite. More of a harder edge. If I listen to The Beatles these days it's mostly the post-1967 stuff. But even if that wasn't the case, not everyone likes The Beatles My parents were never fans and I know other people who really couldn't care less. There's no requirement that everyone must love The Beatles.

> Tomorrow Never Knows IS my favorite Beatles song of all time, YES! ME TOO!

may the schwartz be with you

I've been using separation technology for a year now to make instrumentals of all Queen's output (inc solo) - but what's on the 'public' market can't even split the drums up like that - at best it can only seperate the drums from the rest of the music. Staggering!

@@pootle5096 I've played around with LALAL and Moises to remove drums from songs - guess what I play :) - and it...kinda...sorta...maybe work - but listening to what this software can do on Taxman and Tomorrow Never Knows - I am really excited to to see what's next.

@@DisjointedConversations Lalal is poor. I first started using (and paying!) for that in May last year. Then I discovered X-Minus Pro. FAR SUPERIOR!

@@pootle5096 thanks. I’ll check it out

Hyperdimensionality........

He is a true blessing!

Thank you, Giles, for carrying on your late father Sir George's legacy!

Greatest album ever ….. for me at least

I don’t get it. Your friends don’t wanna discuss?

@@JJJJJVVVVVLLLLL I teach a class in music production and maybe 1 out of 30 wants to talk about the Beatles I'm sad to report.

@@onetripwonders Music of today evokes association w antidepressants, mood controlling pharma stuff imo. Clean, smooth, goes nowhere

Im 56 and have never known anyone I could talk with in detail about all the apparently odd subjects Im interested in and have learned a lot about.

Sounds just like him.

You fkn cretin people dont know shyte! The Beatles original recordings are the audio equivalent of Picasso and the other great masters of art... These Giles Martin mixes including his other meddling on their catalogue is actually quite disturbing and wrong and I am sure Lennon and Harrison would not be happy about it.. All the dynamics and space have been molested.

Actually, the standout was Within You Without You/Tomorrow Never Knows.

Pepper can’t hold revolvers jock strap (but iconic album cover)

AMEN!

So many styles!

There is no apostrophe in its.

@@skinovtheperineum1208 - Hahahaha - I was thinking the same thing... I admit I'm rather a Grammar Nazi...

@@fiendishthingy1630 - Some people say Grammar Nazi, I prefer to think the language needs to be saved before we are all reduced to grunting to get our ideas across. How can language be taught in school if the teachers don't even know how to read or write?

@@skinovtheperineum1208 - I have gone so far as to pull out my pen and make a correction on my restaurant menu... but only if it's really egregious...