The Who - My Generation Super Deluxe Edition box set coming

That's good to know. The master tape for the 45 mix is MIA. Maybe MCA should give me a call and buy my 45 dub

 

Got my Japanese SHM-CD box + promo goodies yesterday.

 

Unfortunately, I doubt you'd even have much luck if you contacted them and offered it for free.

 

Are they even aware that the version of "Circles" that they have isn't the original one?

 

I would be somewhat surprised if anyone at Universal knew.

The person in charge of sound for Who reissues should know, but...good luck.

 

So where would one get the single version of "Circles"?

 

The MCA The Who Sings My Generation CD.

It just doesn't sound very good.

 

I just don't get who makes the decisions with this stuff. How on earth do they not get this stuff right for what one would think would be the definitive musical document of this era? I understand in the '90s for whatever reason they did all the remixing and futzing around. But these days you would think they'd get things right. Like for instance, they finally got the correct "Young Man Blues" for the super deluxe Tommy set. But then again, the less said about the live disc on that set, the better. So I guess this stuff just shouldn't come as a surprise.

 

They finally used the correct version of Young Man Blues, but from a less than great needledrop.

As far as Circles goes, I guess it didn't help that it was released under a cloud of legal issues, an incorrect name, and US Decca never got a tape copy.

 

Are you saying that Circles on the 1966 Decca vinyl LP is also a needle drop?

 

I've not looked up these laws in a long, long time...I wouldn't doubt that the UK copyright code directly addresses internet streaming, as it goes to great legnths to define and codify radio and TV "transmissions" (remember--in the UK, one must pay a "licence" fee to own a television).

Also (again, if memory serves) the US laws relating to internet streaming were written back in the mid-90's, and are in serious need of revision, if only to make them actually apply to current technology for a few weeks. I don't know if any serious attempts at such a revision are forthcoming, as the whole SOPA debacle apparently caused Congress to conclude that the days of being able to quietly enact any copyright legislation have long since passed.

But I digress: IIRC, one reason that Wolfgang's Vault was able to evade infringement when it streamed concerts like the 1968 Fillmore East show is that it claimed it was permitted to do so by a loophole in the (again, antiquated) federal code that creates a compulsary license for certain internet broadcasters to broadcast music. The thinking was that internet streaming was seen as a nascent market, and that internet broadcasters simply lacked the leverage to negotiate affordable licenses with PRO's such as ASCAP. (Remember--a sound recording copyright does not include performance rights--it does not extend to the exclusive right to play a particular sound recording.) That Wolfgang's Vault certainly possessed this leverage was not a possibility contemplated by Congress back in 1997 or so. Thus, at least one of WV's legal stances was that it fell within this federal definition of "intetnet broadcaster" and was entitled to this compulsary license, even if the recordings consisted of unreleased live music.

Was Wolfgang's Vault correct? It's hard to say--none of the litigation ever went to trial, and the federal code remains unchanged. It was within this grey area that most parties apparently reached a settlement, as both WV and the artists apparently recognized that the last thing they needed was a court decision that could conceivably weaken the law for everybody concerned. Each artist apparently reached spearate settlements; for example, The Who allows streaming of thhis material; certain artists now allow WV to sell actual downloads, while I believe all live Led Zeppelin material was permanently removed from the site a long time ago.

 

This same needledrop was used on the HDTracks Odds and Sods. My ears aren't as experienced unlike many of the folks here, and I could tell that it was a needledrop and a mediocre one at that.

 

Yes.

It's not an amazing sounding album, but I know it's possible to do a better needledrop than that. I believe I had even sent one of my own a few years ago.

 

Hey Luk, have you tried your hand at needledropping Young Man Blues? Seems such a pity that fans have to seek out better rips and 'drops from fellow fans rather than from record labels. Ron

You beat me to it by a few minutes.

 

Universal should have found/used yours.

The take on the Tommy DVD-A 5.1 is remixed from the multitracks, correct?

I believe the idea on the 2014 digital O&S was to have vintage mixes where possible, so I commend Astley for his motives.

 

Doesn't say much about the compilers does it?

 

It's not necessarily the best possible, but I would argue it's better than what was released.

Yes. And sounds very different.

 

Except that LP's been converted to fake stereo?
So it's not an exact needle drop?

 

The mono LP is mono. As are most pressings of the CD.

 

My copy looks pristine and sounds like garbage

 

Great cover of Circles! The Crying Shames copy Fleur De Lys arrangement, even a valiant attempt at the freakout guitar solo The BBC archives are loaded with great surprise covers like this (ie. Hendrix - Day Tripper; Herman's Hermits - Tallyman; Tony Jackson Group - Almost There etc etc)

 

It is well done and quite the psychedelic solo. Ron

 

I guess I did have a question:

While I do have the original 1987 MCA "Two's Missing", the 2002 MG Deluxe Edition, the 2008 Japanese MG boxed set and the 2011 Japanese "Two's Missing", I've never sat down to figure out exactly what is different about the alternate stereo version of "Daddy Rolling Sttone" on the 2008 Japanese box. Now, with two more "alternate versions" of "Daddy Rolling Stone" to ponder, I'm even more confused. While it is apparant that the stereo "Alternate B" and the mono "Alternate" are missing the backing vocals, it strikes me that all of these versions seem to have the same Daltrey vocal. Am I wrong on this? Are these truly alternate takes, or are they a hybrid of previously released vocals over alternate backing tracks, or are they merely alternate mixes?

I guess that part of the reason I ask this is because the Who have have released several songs from this era over the years that qualify as true "alternate" versions ("Mary Anne With The Shakey Hand", "I'm A Boy", "Heat Wave", "Happy Jack", "Eyesight To The Blind" and of course "Circles") and it makes me a little insane when I understand a parrticular version is an alternate, yet I can't figure out why. (I've had that gold MFSL "Who Are You" for decades and have never taken the time to figure out what is so different about the alternate "Guitar And Pen" on that release.)

Or maybe I just haven't played "Daddy Rolling Stone" nearly as often as other songs in the Who catalog. (Understandable.)

 

There were so many versions of it, I listened to them all on Spotify and the only ones I actually kept track of are the single mix and the Two's Missing stereo mix. Always back at square one.

I feel the same way about the version of "Happy Jack" in the Maximum R&B box set. Obviously the acoustic version is an alternate.