DCC Archive Any info on the new Who - complete LAL?

Nice to see the board back! Wish it was during a happier week. To anyone in NYC - your firefighters, rescue workers and your Mayor are all an inspiration!!!

Does anyone have info on the new, complete LAL. Is it out, when, where, label, sound quality, source tape, remastering, mix???

Thanks!

richard

 

As far as I know it's mixed by Andy M, mastered by Astley. Someone who had a pre-release copy said that the mastering between disc 1 and disc 2 was different, and that disc 2 sounded better. Shakin' All Over will NOT be included, and there are a few other edits as well. I don't know the extent of them, but there was word that some vocals would be re-done for the new issue. I know some vocals in Heaven & Hell and A Quick One were re-done for the 1995 issue.

I'll pick it up, but the bootleg will still be the CD of choice for me.

 

Just a guess here, but I think Luke mean that "Spoonful" will not be included in "Shakin All Over." Pretty idiotic decision IMHO. We've already got the Spoonful-less version of Shakin All Over on the '95 remix. As long as they were adding back Pete's between song comments as well as the Tommy performance, why couldn't they have added back the Spoonful segment of Shakin All Over? Doh! You can pretty much bet this will be covered in ICE's CD Watchdog column, and that Astley will have some pretty lame excuse (e.g., the performance was sub-par -- which was the reason they originally gave for not including the Tommy set on the original deluxe reissue).

 

Quoth David

Right - that's exactly what I meant.

Once again, reasons of a sub-par performance have been given. Looks like we won't hear it other than the boot...

 

Quoth Gary

That's exactly what they're doing.

Actually, I think they feel they can stretch the truth a bit. Technically, the new issue does include every song. It's just that several of the songs have been edited.

Well, Jon will just spew out some BS like he always does. Why Pete keeps him on is beyond me...

 

To Luke "P": Jon Astley is Pete Townsend's brother-in-law (he's married to Pete's sister). That's why he's been entrusted with stewardship of the Who's catalog. So basically, everything he's done with the catalog is done with the direct approval of Pete Townsend.

[ September 16, 2001: Message edited by: luke j chung ]

 

I'm aware of Jon's personal relationship with Pete (for the record, Pete and Karen are separated). However, I would think Pete would get the clue that Jon doesn't know what he's doing...

 

But doesn't Pete have tinnitus?

 

Yes Tinnitus is something you can't shake. He doesn't suffer from it as much, as he uses a lot of homeopathic methods to keep his head straight with the pain and ringing in his ears. He was able to get on stage a lot easier only soon after.

I agree with Luke, as Astley has done seriously rotten jobs to the Who catalogue.

/Sudden end of what would be a long ass rant.

 

I picked this one up yesterday. I don't have the comments I've already written handy, but this sums it up: BAD.

Thin, hollow, harsh - all describe the sound on this release, particularily the Tommy portion. I barely made it through listening to disc 2. The drums and audience in particular often sound like they are coming from inside tin cans. LOTS of noise reduction.

A fair number of new vocal overdubs by Roger. Almost all of Listening To You was newly overdubbed by him. On Acid Queen, Pete is mixed way down and Roger is mixed out altogether.

Yeah, I put on Overture from the new CD, then put on the bootleg. Wow - no comparison. The boot sounds 100% better.

This is a really sad release, people...

Once I get home I'll C/P my comments that I posted to Odds & Sods.

 

Ok, here are a few messages I previously posted to O&S:

---
Ok, I *just* got back from the store and have Tommy going. Unfortunately, Jon Astley strikes again. The drums in particular have a *very* thin/hollow/metallic sound to them. Not natural in the slightest. Also, I'm hearing some nasty distortion coming from Pete's guitar, whereas I've never noticed any on the boot.

One plus is there *is* a wee bit more chatter on this issue that somehow didn't make it on the boot - I'll have more comments on that later once I listen some more. If nothing else perhaps I can use a few of those bits to make an even more complete LALC...<g>

More comments once I get a chance to get through this and digest it. Bottom line (for the moment) - that same harsh/thin/metallic sound Jon seems so anxious to provide.

---
...while I *still* don't like the mix on the 1995 CD, I do think that it sounds pretty good. IMO, the drums are too loud (among other things), but everything does sound good.

On the other hand, I'm not finding this new disc fun to listen to at all. Thin, hollow, shrill - that pretty much sums it up.

Other side notes. There's at least one vocal overdub by Roger in Eyesight To The Blind. Noticed that right off. Also, it's interesting that they left in at least one of the flubs in Christmas (where everybody misses the cue).

More as I listen more...

---
This *isn't* getting better the more I listen to it...

A few more notes:

- Go To The Mirror has a couple of edits to remove flubs
- almost all of (if not all of) Roger's vocals in "Listening To You" are newly overdubbed.
- Roger's vocal is almost mixed all the way out on Acid Queen, and Pete is a bit hard to hear as well
- Eyesight To The Blind has at least one small vocal overdub by Roger
- they left Sally Simpson alone during the bit where Roger stops singing - thankfully!
- there are a number of crowd noise overdubs in an attempt to mask the changes in the master reels

Just for ****s and giggles, I just played back Overture on the remix. Then I switched to the boot. WOW. The boot simply blew me away. The remix is slightly more defined in places, but the bootleg is a lot smoother, fuller, more cohesive, and just feels "together". The boot has a nice "breathy" sound to it, which the remix doesn't have at all - to me the remix seems COLD and STERILE.

Now, I keep saying "remix". I don't know how much of the problem is in the mix itself or with the mastering. I have a feeling the mastering is a *lot* of it, although I think there *are* a few things in the mix itself that are questionable.

What I wouldn't do to get a "complete/error-free" version of the boot. Ie, no overdubs, no edits, *everything* that's on the tapes, no "let's turn down this vocal track because someone is a bit out of tune", no crowd noise overdubs to mask stuff, and no added echo/effects. I guess I can only dream...
---

Ok, that's it for the old comments. Let me say this - I wasn't expecting much since Astley was doing it, and I ended up expecting too much. This is *far* worse than I was anticipating. Terrible.

If anyone says "you pick on Jon Astley too much," just listen to this CD.

 

<STRONG>If anyone says "you pick on Jon Astley too much," just listen to this CD.</STRONG>

Why would we?

I have a very practical question: why do you keep buying Astley remasters? You were pretty much satisfied with the boot, no? You've had years of complaining about Astley. Then you spend more money on one of his releases. Why? I don't get it.

When I have substantial reason to believe a release is going to suck, I avoid it.

 

Maybe in 20 years we might see a small label do something amazing with the Who.

I'm very happy with the honest, clean sound of the LAL bootleg. (Nod to Luke) I saw the Polygram repackage, fondled it and put it back. I just didn't get a very warm fuzzy feeling about bringing it to the counter and dropping $30 on it.

I bought NOS vinyl just for kicks, even a few old laser discs instead. I became more pleased there. Thank you, Luke for confirming the truth and keeping an open mind.

It's not for the fact that most of us were expecting dissapointment, it's the fact that the dissapointment keeps coming. It doesn't take much to do it right, just hard honest work and love for the music.

 

Probably because there's always *hope* that something might be better. Heck, the Parvadigar single wasn't too bad.

Plus, this is The Who. Live At Leeds. How can I pass on it? At the very least I'll *know* it's bad, and *why* it's bad.

Besides, it's one more thing to note on my website...

 

Quoth Sckott

It doesn't even take that! I'm sure that this CD would sound a *lot* better if it weren't mastered at all. I don't know how much time Jon spends on this stuff, but all he does is degrade the sound. So much for "mastering"...

 

I can realte with Luke's passion for the Who as many might look to him for answers and opinions for Who reissues in public forums like Usenet, DCC and O&S.

But for me, I agree with you, Patrick, only because if one's tastes are more diverse, your money is better spent on other things. Thanks Luke, nonetheless. Many people need to know, hopefully someone might do something about it someday.

With that, it may be the fact that Luke sacrifices his ~$31.99 that we can all thank him and aviod a bad disc.

If I were Luke, I'd burn a copy for reference, as I'm sure he'd want to, and sell it on half.com or eBay.

 

You agree with me?

Wow...I'm saving this post.

 

Gentlemen:

Thanks for your comments and opinions. Did JA do the '95 LAL and Tommy remasters (which actually don't sound bad to me) and does anyone have any ideas where the LAL boot can be found these days???

richard

 

Jon was involved, but he didn't do the mastering on either of those.

Good luck finding the boot. You're better off finding someone else who's got it and getting a copy made.

 

Odds and Sods was the first Who CD actually mastered by Jon Astley. The CDs released before that had him involved in other various capacities (locating the wrong tapes, adding digital clicking noises, etc), but not the mastering process. Odds and Sods, BBC Sessions, and the new Live at Leeds are the ones with his imprimatur...

 

JA huh! Yuk! Maybe that explains why the sound on "BBC Sessions" is so lousy, tinny and thin! Pete and the Beeb should offer refunds on that one - then go and collect from Astley!

richard

 

While I picked up the advance UK release of LAL, it was interesting to see on the liner notes..."REmix Supervised by Pete Townshend" !

I mean, who's going to argue with Pete about the quality mix, when they feel compelled to put that on the release !

They must feel beaten up by the criticism.