Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

Fact: The stunning reaction to the mono set took nearly everyone by surprise. Fiction: You made the wrong choice by buying the stereo set. Fact: The vocals/instruments separation in some of the stereo albums is wider than the actual crosswalk shown on the Abbey Road cover. Fiction: You made the wrong choice by buying the stereo set. Fact: The mono set's enthusiasts' reviews have a lot of merit and are based on more than mere nostalgia. Fiction: You made the wrong choice by buying the stereo set. Being a 57-year-old Beatles fan has its advantages, not the least of which is having some perspective on the two current remastered sets from EMI. (By the way, I bought from Amazon the individual stereo CDs -- except for the YS soundtrack -- at low prices and applied the money I saved toward the mono box set, which I had intended to get all along.) I don't consider myself a Beatles completist. Still, at one time or another over the years I have had and embraced the original Vee-Jay, Swan, and Capitol mono 45s; nearly all the mono and stereo albums from Capitol (the stereo versions of which I had rebought at least twice by 1980); various British, German, and other European imports (mono and/or stereo, depending on the album); reissued British (mono) EPs on vinyl; all the 1987 EMI compact discs; the three "Anthology" sets; the "YS Songtrack," "1", and "Let It Be...Naked"; the Capitol box sets from a few years ago (which I really like); and now these terrific EMI remasters. And while I have never bought any Beatles bootleg CDs, over the years I have listened to other fans' exhaustive box sets of the "Let It Be" sessions and the BBC sessions, all kinds of live shows from around the world, and other entries in the band's unofficial output. I mention this not in an attempt to impress anyone. There are many of you out there who have heard and own far more Beatles music than I ever have or ever will. But it underscores (1) the substantial amount of music the boys created in a short span of time; (2) the seemingly countless formats and mix variations -- some subtle, some striking -- of specific songs and of the albums themselves despite there being just "a" mono mix and just "a" stereo mix; and (3) the soul connection I have to this body of music. I wish I had experienced one of their live concerts during Beatlemania. But in early December of 1963 I did whip my head around at the dinner table to catch the CBS Evening News report on the growing Beatles phenomenon in Great Britain. That was my first clue. A month later, my mom and I watched a segment on the Beatles that the wry Jack Paar aired on his Friday night TV show in January 1964. And my folks, my kid brother, my grandparents, and I watched the Beatles perform on the Ed Sullivan Show on February 9, 1964. I was hooked. I should also point out that I'm not an audiophile; my whole sound system didn't cost me more than $3,000. That won't buy speaker wire in some high-end systems. But an actual audiophile (a guy half my age whose expertise and opinions I truly respect) helped me configure my listening room so that my 4-speaker system helps deliver warmth, clarity, presence, and punch whether the music is presented in mono or stereo and regardless of what kind of music it is. I have listened to these 2009 remasters a lot in the past couple of months. Oh, I mixed in some Byrds and Beach Boys, some blues and jazz, and some country and folk here and there. But I have focused on these remasters. Overall, I prefer the stereo mixes. And I'm not a stereo-only proponent anymore than I am a mono-is-best proponent. But I like the way the electric guitars ring and chime (especially George's Ric 12-string, which inspired another of my R&R heroes, Roger McGuinn) and the way the acoustic guitars hum. I like how Ringo -- one of my all-time favorite rock drummers -- cracks and thumps his drums. I like how Paul's bass lines, too often buried in the mix in previous vinyl and CD incarnations, prove once and for all just how good the guy was all along. I like how John's rhythm guitar sounds and how his vocal inflections emerge. Most of all, I like how those tight harmonies, whether they're based on the Everly Brothers' vocal arrangements or something the boys and George Martin created from scratch, fill this room. These stereo remasters make this very familiar music sound so fresh and vibrant and clear that I want to buy a round of drinks for the team of engineering professionals who spent four years of their lives to give us this Digital Age treasure-trove. That said, I do like several of the mono mixes nearly as much and maybe more. Sgt. Pepper is thrilling to hear in its mono presentation. It really is. It's different enough from the stereo mix to draw my wife in from another room to exclaim, "I don't remember THAT being on there!" Another mono mix which arguably tops its stereo counterpart is Please Please Me. This seminal Beatles long-player has never sounded so good. Plus, like its 1987 EMI precursor, the title track -- my favorite of the band's early rockers along with "Twist And Shout" and "I Saw Her Standing There" -- is the version that's free of the fluffed vocals on the last verse. That alone was going to ensure I'd be buying the mono box set in addition to the stereo remasters. "Anna," "There's A Place," "Love Me Do" -- these and other tracks also sound great in mono. (I'm not sure any degree of remastering will spur me to like "Ask Me Why," with its "woo-woo-woo-woo" and "I-I-I-I" refrains, but that's just me.) The mono remasters of With The Beatles and Beatles For Sale are also top-notch. (Though, again, new and improved sound still won't compel me to listen to "Mr. Moonlight" on a regular basis.) And, The Beatles (the "White Album") in mono is different enough from its stereo counterpart (and so rock-solid) that it too warrants a favorable comparison. Still, the stereo mixes overall will remain the versions I most often pop into my CD player. They are exhilarating to listen to. So, if you bought the stereo set but have been mentally kicking yourself after having read all the rave reviews of the mono mixes, please know that you chose wisely. You really did. If your curiosity about the mono set hasn't subsided and you can afford to get it, do so. There are enough differences between the two mixes -- beyond their obvious channel separation -- that you'll gain a deeper appreciation for the talent and energy that went into creating each mix back in the day. But -- and this is my one big caution to you -- if you're unaccustomed to listening to classic rock and pop music in mono, you may find it a bit of a jolt to your senses. To your ears, mono Beatles music may indeed sound "muddy," "flat," and "dead" as termed by some fans who've posted reviews in one or both of the two box set forums. Personally I enjoy both mixes being offered in these 2009 remasters. That's because regardless of the artist or the genre of music we're talking about, mono and stereo mixes have both been part of my listening experience since I was a little kid back in the late 1950s. But that may not be true for you; your experience may be based more on one or the other. And so, as much as I dig the mono PPM and mono Sgt. Pepper, as much of a kick as I get from hearing both the subtle and dramatic differences between all the songs and albums presented in both mixes, these great-sounding stereo discs have now formed the core of my Beatles collection. Ultimately, YOUR tastes and YOUR preferences are all that matter. Not my take on "mono vs. stereo" and not anyone else's. The fact that you are passionate about the music the boys and Sir George created all those years ago is reason enough to rejoice that you and I and millions of other Beatle people the world over finally have these dynamic remasters.