wasn't the best remaster, I'll give him that (I think it's because you can't top perfection, but that's just me!
). If you listen to other albums (Past Masters
Vol. 1 is a good one... so is, in my opinion, The White Album) and you'll hear a difference. It clearer, you can hear more (and I'm not just talking about volume differences either; you can hear background noises and talking... it's astounding, to me, the kind of depth you get from these remasters!). I wish he'd compared a different album... .
But aside from that, there are differences in the actual tracks themselves. On the stereo remaster of The White Album, you can hear Paul singing along with his bass on "I Will" (makes the song terribly charming, if you don't mind me saying so). That's something I had only faintly detected on my 1987 CD, and it's fully present on the 2009s. Or on the mono Sgt. Pepper
remaster, "She's Leaving Home" is pitched up, creating a slightly faster and, I think, nicer sounding song. Those are big differences that are not simply explained by dB volume adjustments.
And anyway, even if they were just adjusted for volume, who cares? I haven't spoken with a single person who bought the remasters (mono or stereo) who hasn't found something to love about them. On tiny computer speakers, you may not notice a huge difference, but even my crappy MacBook speakers won't let the differences completely
elude me, and I'm no crazy audiophile like this reviewer is. If you're willing to pay the money for it, and if you have a good quality hi-fi or headphone set you can listen with, and if you love The Beatles, then you'll enjoy the remasters. End of story.