[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Assorted gripes



>This is something that I, as a record buyer, hate; the fact that every old

>record is remixed/remastered etc. 
  
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but every album has to be remastered
(at least once) in order to be released on CD.  If your gripe is with the
"upgrading" of artists' catalogs, I think you should be a little more
selective in your complaints.  My problem isn't with upgrading per se --
indeed, I think record labels are morally obligated to upgrade CDs when a
better source tape is located or a new mastering technology allows for a
noticeable improvement in sound quality.  Rather, my problem is that, with
few exeptions (e.g., Rhino, Rykodisc, Sundazed), record labels have
generally done a half-assed job when initially remastering older albums for
CD.   
 
As for remixing, I think there are some recordings for which the sound is
so distinctive (e.g., the Motown and Stax singles, just about anything
produced by Phil Spector or Brian Wilson, etc.) that remixing either
shouldn't be attempted, or should only be done as a supplement to the
original mixes.  And if an album was well produced to begin with and the
original master tapes are in pristine condition (e.g., the Paul
Rothchild-produced Doors albums), there's no real need to remix.  On the
other hand, I think that remixing is entirely appropriate when the original
mixdown tapes are lost or damaged, or where the original mix was inferior. 
Ideally, the remixing would be done on vintage equipment (just compare the
the digital remixes on Rubber Soul and Help! with the analog remixes on
Anthology 2) and would be supervised by the artists themselves along with
the original producer and recording engineer. 
 
Having bought most of the Who Polydor CDs and all of the MFSL Ultradiscs,
I'm not especially thrilled at having to shell out for yet another version,
but at least Astley & Co. have really made an effort to give fans something
extra.  Granted, they haven't given us everything we wanted, but the Who
reissues are still better than nearly every other rock artist reissue on
the market.. 
 
>I love 30 Years...but I give the Beatles a nod over the Who in Anthology
vs. 
>30 Years, because every track on Anthology is previously unreleased.  
 
I wouldn't mind having a box set of unreleased Who material either, but
then again, I don't think the Anthology series really makes up for the
uninspired Beatles catalog CDs, which (unlike the Who CDs), have no bonus
tracks and (with the exception of Sgt. Pepper) no special packaging.     
 
>No one has, to my knowledge, tried to imitate Bruce's Live album on a box,

>have they?   
Actually Crossroads 2, a four CD box set consisting almost exclusively of
live recordings of Clapton between 1974 and 1978 is due out next month.  
And, not to be outdone, Rykodisc has released 6 double CD sets of live
Frank Zappa material (the You Can't Do that Onstage series).