Revolver remastered is a disappointment

Hi Greg,
Broke down and bought Revolver at Borders the other night.  Listened down three times, and here is my report:
1. It’s clean and clear, but no improvement whatsoever over my 1982 British-press vinyl release on Parlophone.  That’s not to say it isn’t great, but that pressing from ‘82 was always the one to beat, to my ears.
2a. The big advantage of digital technology is not clarity, but dynamic range.  Analog can be (and typically is) perfectly clear and defined, but has limits, especially in the case of vinyl as compared to tape, with big shifts from soft to loud.  The CD, when it came out, was touted as being able to accurately reproduce the dynamic flow that is present in all great music.  Instead, it quickly became a “convenient” and “portable” medium.  The compression that had to be used on records to make them fit (on vinyl) was transferred, intact, to CDs.  Occasionally you will find artists and producers, like Brian Eno and Daniel Lanois, who understand and exploit this aspect of digital, but generally it has become the norm to use a lot of compression– because it has a certain sound, the sound of pop music on the radio.
2b. Revolver, and I’ll wager, all the rest of the Beatles remasters, is highly compressed.  Bummer.  Tomorrow Never Knows, Good Day Sunshine, And Your Bird Can Sing, Eleanor Rigby– should breathe with the dynamics of live performance.  Instead, they are crystal-clear but canned.  This a too bad.  The same team that did a great job on Let It Be…naked, which is a step in the right direction dynamically, did these remasters, but all they’ve achieved is to make them sound like first-press vinyl.  Again, there is nothing “wrong” with that, but it is so much less than it could be. They could have put us in the room with the Beatles.  Instead, here we are in 2009, listening the Beatles on the radio, the DJ spinning a very good pressing.  Just like old times.