A controversial issue about remastering..."Pet Sounds"

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Claus, Jan 8, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Ed Bishop

    Ed Bishop Incredibly, I'm still here

    I want to hear both sides, but bringing in all these opinions about Steve--true, false, or misconstrued--makes no sense. Since Claus brought up Eroc's work, I'm still waiting for examples I can reference, if I have them.
    That's being fair. Claus is doing a lot of talkin', but not about that.

    ED:cool:
     
  2. Claviusb

    Claviusb A Serious Man

    Right Gabe, but as I pointed out about the Buddy Holly tapes, sometimes it takes more guts to say "I don't need to do anything at all here, too." Steve's consistantly shown that he knows when to turn the proper knobs and when to leave 'em all alone. I believe that's the crux of what this thread is about.
     
  3. mcow1

    mcow1 Sommelier Gort

    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    Kind of the crux of what this forum is all about, isn't it.:D


    edit:Wow, finally made it to 1,000 posts with this one.
     
  4. Claviusb

    Claviusb A Serious Man

    [Gary Cooper]Yupppp![/Gary Cooper]
     
  5. Ken_McAlinden

    Ken_McAlinden MichiGort Staff

    Location:
    Livonia, MI
    That's not quite right. I have never gotten the impression that Peter Mew does not care or just does what he is told. I just disagree with the way he goes about it.

    I wonder how Eroc feels about colorizing old films? :sigh:

    I also firmly believe that if you can please the audio snobs, 99% of the rest of your consumer base will agree that it sounds good as well. On the other hand, if you are not going for the intent of what was put down on the master tape, then maybe they should start referring to it as the "general guideline if you want to bother following it" tape.

    Regards,
     
  6. Sckott

    Sckott Hand Tighten Only.

    Location:
    South Plymouth, Ma
    Not putting words into Steve's mouth either, but...

    In the midst of how Pet Sounds was was completed, it was MADE as a collage, or artwork in the sense of the sound, completely. Brian went so far as to make sure Capitol didn't make real Stereo mixes. He went OUT OF HIS WAY to make sure of this, and was clever as well.

    Sheesh, I don't mean to be a meanie, but anyone with half a brain can do research, or even call up Brian himself and ask him. Originally, his view of the album was pre-concieved LONG before mixing, and he built on it a very half-primitive half-sophisticated mixture of ideas JUST FOR THE SOUND.

    This does not apply to everything. I'm listening to the Whitesnake 3'fer collection on Geffen mastered at 96/24. My eyeballs hurt.... Ok, ok, it applies to most masters.

    There are occasions where the monitors, amps and conditions used at the mixing process is colored to a certain pair of speakers. Steve actaully goes around and plays things, sometimes everywhere in the house to make sure a flat transfer works for things. It usually does, but not all the time. Sometimes the bottom end is just so powerful, it would knock cheap speakers on their knees.

    So do you tame the savage beast for the general consumer with $40 setups in his little bedroom neglecting people who pay and pay attention to their playback chain, or do you master it flat, rolloff NOTHING and if someone tries playing it on their GM car stereo, it 'blows up'...?

    Modern engineers have to worry about these things, but much TOO much is happening. Too much processing, EQ and maximization at the 16-44.1 wavelength to crush and confine original dynamics. Plain and simple. THAT'S the problem today.

    It's not merely making small EQ moves and decisions there in. Steve does this, but at minimum. It takes NO time at all to color a master beyond what it intended.
     
  7. Mike

    Mike New Member

    Location:
    New Jersey
    Eroc? :confused:

    [​IMG]
     
  8. Sckott

    Sckott Hand Tighten Only.

    Location:
    South Plymouth, Ma
    Ok.

    Then my argument to that would be, why not use playback equipment that was made around the period at the age of the recording? If it was mastered at tubes, why not play it back in an Ampex with Telefunkens? If the tape seems to have lost some original flavor to sound genuine, true too, that is an engineer's job. He or she can do whatever she wants.

    The more and more and MORE that is done these days, at the hands with the attitude of our mentioned German fellow coulnd't be further from the original point. It's the recording, the master that has (and has potential) for the original flavor.

    No, it's not merely putting it on an Ampex and hitting play. No way, jose'. In many cases, the 'less is more' approach works in WONDERFUL ways. A job given to Steve to do less IS a job in itself, and a labor of love as well.

    How to not muck with it as much as possible. That's a task.
     
  9. Claus

    Claus Senior Member Thread Starter

    Location:
    Germany
    Thanks Ed... you're right. It's only bad I must defend my posting... it was not my intention to bring such a controversy about Steve and Eroc. I just brought his philosophy... as I've sent him Steve's posting... I didn't told him the posting was from Steve.;)

    I give you my cents you will enjoy the Yardbirds, Procol Harum or T. Rex remasters... they really sound beautiful. Eroc did a lot great jobs... and sometimes he had to use tape or dat copies, while the record companies doesn't submitted the original tapes to Repertoire Records... their Steppenwolf compilation sound good as the Mofi remasters, but with the difference Mofi got the original master tapes. But that doesn't mean the original tape is always the better way. Take Mofi's Frampton Comes Alive Gold remaster and the deluxe edition... the deluxe edition is the clear winner!!! Oops... it was remixed for the new version!;)
     
  10. rontokyo

    rontokyo Senior Member

    Location:
    Tokyo, Japan
    Re: a controversial issue about remastering...

    I *want* to think that what Eroc of Repertoire Records is saying is that there is nothing sacred about master tapes. The mastering engineer should use his skill and judgment AND whatever technology available to make those tapes sound as good as they can. And if indeed that's what he's saying then I doubt that many members here would argue. I personally think Eroc may have misunderstood Steve's comments re: Pet Sounds to mean that out of respect for the "sacred nature" of those particular tapes Steve chose to produce a flat transfer. And has been said here earlier, that wasn't the reason.

    That's what I *want* to think. But I have a nagging suspicion that Eroc may have a hair up his butt re: audiophile types and may master [read: dumb down] his stuff to meet the needs of consumers with very modest systems.
     
  11. Claviusb

    Claviusb A Serious Man

    Claus, you are being taken to task by people because you sent an out of context comment made by Steve to Eroc and asked him to respond, do you see that? Not very sporting of you.
     
  12. lukpac

    lukpac Senior Member

    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    Are you saying that *most* of Steve's work are flat transfers? If so, I don't think that's the case. IIRC, Steve said something like half of what he does are flat transfers.

    [Meaning the other half are not]
     
  13. Claviusb

    Claviusb A Serious Man

    Re: Re: a controversial issue about remastering...



    I agree with your assessment, Ron. But the point is, Steve's comment was sent to this guy out of the blue without any explanation of the context. In my mind Eroc's reply is nearly worthless for that reason. If given the entire story, I can't help but believe that Eroc's resply would be different
     
  14. Matt

    Matt New Member

    Location:
    Illinois
    Eroc's idea of being more democratic at mastering is a bit off. It's nice he's thinking about making CD's sound good for those who can't afford better systems, but I can't think of any good audiophile mastering that, to me, would sound worse than a modern remaster on mid-fi or lo-fi equipment.

    Even if it labels like DCC and Mofi can be accused of being 'elitist,' you'd have to remember that the premium prices of their releases pretty much tell you that they are aimed at those who probably do have better equipment (there are some exceptions, I'm sure, but chances are, a person who has a boatload of $30 retail price CD's probably has some nice stereo equipment, too). All this is moot, though, because there's nothing exclusive about the sound of these audiophile masterings; they will sound better on just about everything.
     
  15. Sckott

    Sckott Hand Tighten Only.

    Location:
    South Plymouth, Ma
    Nah, depends on the material. I don't think he did a lot of flat transfers, totally. His idea is to find what sounds natural. Many of the transfers he's done almost or totally flat go with the point I made specifically. But I'll go so far as to say many sound best left alone.
     
  16. GabeG

    GabeG New Member

    Location:
    NYC
    Claus, how well does EROC speak English?

    I'm wondering that some of the reactions here might be overdone because of semantic differences in what EROC means and how we're taking it.

    As for how many masters Steve has left alone in transfering, I think we should wait for Steve to chime in. Like Luke, I do remember him saying something like half were flat, but again it would be best for all of us back seat masterers to hear from Steve.

    - Gabe
     
  17. Ed Bishop

    Ed Bishop Incredibly, I'm still here

    Claus, pal, if you're still around....how many Steve quotes did you send Eroc? The reason I ask is, it's possible that, if you simply took the PET SOUNDS passage and sent Eroc that--and no other quotes about Steve's mastering philosophy--that may be where the misunderstanding is. Could Eroc have taken this to mean it was Steve's entire, complete, unwavering remastering philsophy? If so, Eroc's reaction might be understandable. As Luke notes, Steve has never claimed to master everything he's ever done 'flat'; rather, the impression I've had from the beginning is that he likes to keep the sound of the original tape as 'honest as possible' without changing its basic essence, so the less tinkering, the better. He certainly 'tweaks' tapes to some extent: otherwise, what makes his work so special to so many of us here wouldn't exist. I always had the impression he works strictly on a song-by-song basis(when necessary), and album-by-album when there's a unified whole(ala PET SOUNDS)where the sonics are fairly consistent in style and tone throughout.

    But lest anyone wonder why so many us think so highly of Steve, I will give you a little notation found in the booklet of the DCC Gold FRESH CREAM:

    Minor pops and ticks are present on some of the original master mixes.
    Noise on N.S.U. is on master tape.

    I'm So Glad was mixed to mono only.

    He didn't have to tell the listener any of that. Most people might not notice, or care. But he thought enough of anybody plunking down $30 for an expensive piece like this to make sure they knew.

    Most of all, it's instructive he left those inherent flaws--which, upon listening, are no big deal, BTW--on the master, rather than do the usual major label hocus-pocus to remove any sonic blemish, no matter the cost to sound quality.

    And, with all due respect, you still haven't mentioned any actual titles that Eroc has done. My CD collection is a shambles as is, most of it still waiting to be resequenced so I can actually find something. Tracking down Repertoire discs in this place is hard enough without knowing what examples of Eroc's best work(in your opinion)are fine examples of how HE
    goes about his work.

    But at least, Claus, you've started an interesting thread :D , because so far, it sure hasn't been boring. Hell, any thread that can bring Angel in from the L.A. heat has to be worthwhile, right?:angel:

    ED:cool:
     
  18. Claus

    Claus Senior Member Thread Starter

    Location:
    Germany
    It seems Eroc's answer was misunderstood... I just have sent him one phrase from Steve's Pet Sounds mastering.

    Eroc has a completely different mastering philosophy... and he does not fight against Steve. It's just his personal opinion how to handle a reissue.

    I hope Eroc will reply personal... let see what happen.
     
  19. Evan

    Evan Senior Member


    What!! Ticks, pops and noise!?!?! MONO!!! :eek: I never noticed. Maybe if I play it louder..... ;)

    BTW, the DCC Pet Sounds Cd sounds great on everything I play it on. Can't say that for my Capital version. :sigh:
    Great job Steve!! Keep up the good work. PLEASE!!! :cool:
     
  20. Pepzhez

    Pepzhez New Member

    Location:
    NM
    There isn't and really can't be any general hard and fast rules about this. I'm fairly certain that both Eroc and Mr. Hoffman would agree with this statement, as some things require some tweaking, some masters are in bettter condition than others, and some things are best left alone - or at least require the bare minimum of intervention (ala Pet Sounds).

    As for Eroc, his real name is Joachim Heinz-Ehrig, and was the drummer for Grobschnitt throughout the 70's until 1983. He also had a very interesting parallel solo career - very much an experimental eccentric, somewhat of a German equivalent of Zappa or (a bit less so) Captain Beefheart. His lp from 1976, Eroc Zwei, is a minor classic in the underground German rock cannon - and is quite inventive. I believe he has worked mainly as a producer since the mid-1980's. One thing for sure, Eroc is no hack. He's a well respected musician and composer, and the quality of his productions speak for themselves.

    In Eroc's defense, his remasters do sound good; one can tell that his paramount concern is a musical experience, and I think he succeeds rather well. His recent remastering job of the early Amon Düül II catalog is rather impressive, I must say. These remasters blow away all previous issues - flat transfers of tapes that were not in the best condition to begin with (and were not recorded in the most optimal conditions either).

    I can't speak for him, but I'd be willing to bet he wouldn't make any drastic changes to Pet Sounds either. In fact, judging from the results he obtains, I am fairly certain that his philosophy on this topic would be much closer to Mr. Hoffman's than most other mastering engineers would be.
     
  21. audiodrome

    audiodrome Senior Member

    Location:
    North Of Boston
    Whoa! I have a bunch of Repertoire CDs that were remastered by EROC and I think they sound pretty damn good. Are you guys listening or just judging on his comments?
     
  22. Ed Bishop

    Ed Bishop Incredibly, I'm still here

    Finally! Paul, can you list some of the more obvious things EROC has done?
    I would appreciate that(as you will understand if you've read the entire thread). And, yes, we were judging on his comments, but it's become obvious something may have been lost in the translation. Read those comments in full, however, and tell me you're not taken a little aback by them. It's also obvious Claus didn't intend for this to be a Steve vs. EROC thing, either, but, again, if you haven't, read everything to date if you haven't already. I'm a bit confused about it, too. Thanks.

    ED:cool:
     
  23. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    I once said somewhere else that Europeans and the British have different philosophies on mastering that the US, in general. I think there is great truth to this.

    The fact that he says he is a musician first speaks volumes to me. Musicians tend to think much more creatively. Musicians like to change things. It also seems that this Eroc doesn't care that much for mastering.
     
  24. Michael

    Michael I LOVE WIDE S-T-E-R-E-O!

    I've been quite satisfied with Rep, Edsel and Ace Records for years...:)
     
  25. Sckott

    Sckott Hand Tighten Only.

    Location:
    South Plymouth, Ma
    I too. I have some Rep and Ace product kicking around here. A lot of it is wonderful stuff.

    I'm listening. I have for years. Capitol's Pet Sounds isn't bad, and besides, I listen to the box set quite a bit. I think it was a wonderful idea that such tribute was given to that marvelous album.

    I feel privilidged that I got a copy of Pet Sounds on LP knowing what a killing it gets on eBay NOW. Nuff said. :)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine