The AFGHAN WHIGS to reissue GENTLEMEN

What is so "late 80's" about a running time of 48 minutes? I would think this is rather early 70's with Genesis and Yes albums clocking in at 50+ minutes.

Besides I don't think albums that run 50 minutes sound worse than albums that are shorter. And what has digital or analogue to do with the price? A digitally sourced album isn't worth $25 but an "all analogue" is? Do you even know if the 1993 original was analogue?

My UK copy sounds fantastic. Bottom line: If you don't like it cling to your CD but please stop putting something down you haven't even heard. Based on pure mythology.

EG: What was the running time of "Abbey Road" again??

 

I just got into them earlier this year with the purchased of GM on CD. It's odd, I thought it sounded dirty but I think that's more of the vibe/content than the overall recording. It just has this interesting feel.

 

Yes, I'm sure it's nothing "audiophile" but it that doesn't mean it can't sound good. In saying that, I wonder if it could sound better than the original cd (which I have). I don't own a home cd player and do almost all my listening on vinyl. I will keep a lookout on overall reviews.

 

Sorry, after reading my post I did come off a little brash and pessimistic. That wasn't my intention but let me explain myself a bit.

Most lps I have from the late 70s are 40 minutes or less and I only noticed the trend of going over becoming the normal from the mid 80s-90s and this makes sense as CDs were taking over. This trend continued until the early 90s but then we started to see lps over 50 mins spread across 2-lps. I guess that makes sense with some prog bands from the late 70s with longer albums. I never thought about that. I actually don't inspect running times that often so I'm sure I'm missing a number of other titles!

I have plenty of lps that run 45-50 minutes that sound great but they would sound better if spread across 3 sides but admittedly that is being tedious. A band like Drive by Truckers does this so the SQ is better but not all bands are going to bother. Many times this is recommended by vinyl mastering engineers. Many say the rule of thumb is keep a single lp to 40 minutes or less for optimum sound quality but as you mention it can sound good going over. In saying that, I'm actually listening to the new Tom Petty Hypnotic Eye 1-lp and with a running time of 44:47. Their is a 2-lp version of this is said to sound even better but I'm sticking with the 1-lp as I snagged it off Amazon for $11 and the 2-lp is $40+. One might be a 9 SQ and the other a 10 with more room to "breathe" but this is simple cost analysis at this point. Funny thing, is I wanted to play devil's advocate with the 1-lp vs 2-lp for this title.

Honestly, I can't be 100% if it's an analog recording as well as the mix because I'd have to do more research. I just got into this band recently so my knowledge isn't deep. Most rock lps recorded around this time were analog recordings and most were mixed analog as well but the vinyl was typically cut from the 16/44 master (which can still sound good). It could easily be ADAT recording as was mentioned earlier. As far as analog mastered lps costing more than digitally mastered, well this all depends. I'm sure their is an additional cost for cutting a completely different vinyl mastering from tape but how much does it add at the end, well few of us have enough experience to confirm. What I do know is that an all analog vinyl mastering, nice pressing and packaging can be done for the $25-$30 range retail while a 1-lp reissues taken from a digital master typically range in the $15-$25 range depending on pressing quality but the latter is a bit high. It doesn't mean I won't buy it. This could be a great reissue!

In the end, I hope you understand that I wasn't trying to simply put the reissue down. My main goal was to communicate that it would be nice to have it spread across 3 sides but I can also get why they didn't bother doing it. That's cool that you have the original UK version! This reissue would be an interesting comparison.

Oh wow! Abbey Road is almost the same running time! Hahahaha. We learn something new everyday. Sorry if I came off as an ass.

 

Any more reviews of the single LP? I saw this yesterday in my local... I believe it was rhino?

Pressing, mastering quality, source?

 

I can comment on quality. Packaging is GREAT. Sound is GREAT. Cant comment on source but Id buy with confidence. Im just super happy to finally have a copy of this on vinyl...

 

They were good! It was diferent seeing them without McCollum, but still good.

 

did u seem them cover jeff buckley's morning theft. really cool vid of them doing it

 

thanks for the feedback! have you looked at the deadwax markings to see if there is any kind of familiar markings of maybe who cut the vinyl?

 

I'll have to check tonight when I get home from work. I'll let you know!

 

No, I saw them do Accross 110th St.

 

I think it was an analog recording at a minimum. There is a 33 1/3 Book for Gentlemen (which you can read on google preview) and it says that it was recorded in Studio A of Ardent in Memphis which had recently been fitted with a Studer 827 24 track Analog recorder.

 

Does anybody know if the UK Blast First limited edition of Gentlemen (including bonus 12inch) is a good sounding version of this album? There's a nice clean copy available locally for €25 and I'm wondering if it would be a better purchase than the reissue?

 

Yes i have an original pressing on Blast First and it sounds very good indeed.

 

This is a very good edition! Better than the remaster? No idea but at 25 Euros this should be a nobrainer. I've seen the triple version yesterday... it was super expensive (almost 60 Euros) and had a strange looking silverfoil cover... no idea what that is all about...

 

Curious if anybody's done a comparison between one of the original pressings and the recent 21st Anniversary pressing.

I picked-up a copy of the RSD 3xLP edition last weekend. I have originals of the US Sub Pop and the UK Blast First, but I don't have immediate access to them.
I spun through the 3 LPs of the 21st anni issue today, and found the mastering to be pretty quiet, and the overall mix to not be as excellent as I hoped.
I had to have the volume up much louder for the album-proper than I do for most other records that I play to match the approximate volume that I'm used to, and then the noise floor of the vinyl itself was more audible than I'd like.
I can't quite articulate what I felt was off about the mix/eq, but I was underwhelmed.
The other two records of the set (demos and b-sides) sounded less disappointing to me, if only because I expect much less, in the way of fidelity, from them.
I should've compared the original US Electra CD issue to the 21st anni vinyl, because I have a feeling I'd've preferred the Electra CD.

The whole package, for the RSD issue, is nice, otherwise.

 

Still on the fence because I can't justify spending almost 60€ on an album I already have. Does anyone know just how limited this is? A local store got three copies and didn't sell a single one. From a marketing point of view they got the timing wrong: I guess they should have released this expensive set first and later come up with the affordable single version

 

I totally agree on the wrong timing; it would've been far more strategic to release the 'regular', single-LP version of the 21st Anni after the RSD edition.
There were 4750 copies of the RSD edition pressed.
The disc of demos is pretty cool (I'm impressed by how sorted they had the tunes for the demo recordings). Otherwise if you already have the album, and all of the singles (with b-sides), the other discs aren't as crucial. All the goodies and the alternate artwork is cool, but probably not enough to justify the cost, for most fans who have everything other than the demos.

 

4750 copies? What's that all about? Most things Mr.Dulli does have a deeper meaning 4856 copies would have been a cool reference to the running time.

I just preordered it for 45€. Who knows if the store will even get a copy but they had it listed at that price. At least I did try

 

Yeah, not sure. Dulli might've not been part of the quantity decision process, in this case.
I have a CD single/ep for "1965" where the number released was 1965.

Here's a link to where the quantity of the RSD "Gentlemen" 3xLP was announced:

http://www.rhino.com/article/rhino-...day-black-friday-limited-edition-vinyl-titles

 

I finally received the tripple vinyl and felt letdown because - apparently - there are FOUR versions of it. The RSD release for the USA (on Sub Pop) and UK (on Mute/ Blast First) PLUS a "standart" release for each country that also says "limited edition" but doesn't include the sticker, door hanger and photo. At least these items are not advertised on the hype sticker.

Why would they do something like this? And how limited are these versions? According to Discogs both "limited" EU versions are pressed at MPO, housed in a silver foil cover with insert. Both are totally identical. But the RSD version includes extra goodies.

I haven't opened mine to check if these things are inside even if the sticker doesn't advertise them. But anyone on the fence: Check which version you are about to purchase.

Anyway: It's great that they used MPO to press this album but I wonder if the quality of the remaster and bonusdiscs justify me opening it. I've got the original 1993 UK pressing and like it very much. So....what should I do? Open and enjoy or keep it sealed and resell it???

 

I got it a couple of weeks back for £30. Quite expensive and maybe unnecessary since I have a Blast First original and copies of the 2 singles too. I couldn't resist though, as I am a huge fan of the band and that album. The album itself does not sound that different from the Blast First. It has certainly not been volume boosted or had additional compression applied ( i was a bit worried it was going to be super loud like Do To The Beast vinyl). It still has that thick malevolent swampy dark sound to it that has always been there. This album is never going to be an audiophile sound due to that mix. Sonics wise I would say it barely registers as a remaster but that is actually a good thing in this case. Maybe a little more clarity here and there but this album sounds the same as it was intended at the start. The other 2 discs are good to have and an enjoyable listen. I did not get any fancy stickers or anything else, just a standard lyric insert and download code. I think it is good to have and I like the alternative silver foil cover.

 

I ended purchasing this lp recently and gave it a listen this weekend. I have to say the SQ isn't that impressive and the vinyl is rather noisy with and I'm guess it is the signal to noise ratio. I gave it a proper cleaning on the RCM as well. I will be returning it to Amazon and I may or may not try another pressing. There are some good reports here so I may have just got a bad copy. Has anyone done a direct comparison to the original CD?

 

I'm going to sit down and try to do a cd and lp comparison of this album before I send the vinyl back. I hate doing comparisons though. I was really hoping for the best with such a great album.

 

I have held off from buying the LP so far while waiting to get more feedback from others on the SQ. I had a concern that it probably wasn't going to be a slam dunk over the original CD. I'll probably just stick with my CD for this one! Let us know what you hear in the comparisons Mike. Maybe its at least a slight improvement if nothing else