Captain Beefheart Safe As Milk from the MONO master on Sundazed!!

Yup. The only thing I'd say is that The Sundazed ad speaks (obtusely) for itself. It doesn't promise what a few folks feel they've been duped on. Its well written in that regard. Probably because of the propensity of a few audiophiles to be quite vocal about them knowing way more than the artists and industry insiders. The reissue is a mono mix. A restored one. Sounds very close to the original. $20 or something like that.

We're free to complain or go buy a clean original!

 

The claim was not "a" mono mix. It was that it was the rare original mono mix.

 

I didn't catch that. Not disputing it though - I have no clue. In the master tape realm theres often 'the' original ...and originals some of which can be marked 'master tape' etc.

 

I would think word has traveled back about now. The information super-highway is lightning fast, you might be suprised.

 

"Ben Walker: I'd love to know where the mono master was found, I'd always read it was long lost."

"Sundazed Music: If half of what was purported to be lost was actually "lost," we'd be missing tens and tens of thousands of important tapes. Conversely, if everything that was purported to be "found in a dumpster" WAS actually found in a dumpster, we'd all spend half of our lives rooting through stinky studio garbage. A lot of it just ain't so, ya know???"

"Ben Walker: I figured that to be the case. I only brought this one up because the liner notes to the 1999 stereo CD mention there being no mono tape in the vault, but I'm guessing that was a case of "there's no tape... so don't bug us about why it wasn't reissued on this CD""

Sundazed Music - Still, I asked, what would he do if he... | Facebook »

 

Doesn't mean everybody is interested in every little thing happening on it. Yours is just another of the many assumptions being made in this thread.

 

Right. "A" mono mix was the term I used. I mean...it is mono, even the few patches. Mono is what its advertised as.

The term 'original' is interesting. Given the claim the mono was later altered by the label, its unclear (to me) whether that was before or after the commercial LP was released. Theres the white label promo and the commercial red label mono's. Whether they're the exact same or one is altered, I don't know.

 

Exactly.

 

"A" mono mix is the term you used. It isn't the term Sundazed used.

It's unclear what on earth they're talking about, period. But still irrelevant to the problems with the CD, unless you believe that large portions of the "original" mono mix (but not the one used on LP!) were actually derived from the stereo mix.

 

Correct again! And thank you for telling me precisely what I just told you.

The only thing I derive out of their statement is the mono mix was later altered by the label.

As for the CD.... I wouldn't have a clue! I only have the old Buddah stereo.

 

Yes. Which is not what Sundazed said. Which, then, is not relevant to the current discussion.

Which apparently has never been mentioned or documented anywhere before.

Sundazed released Safe as Milk on both CD and LP:

"Now released on LP and CD by Sundazed Music, this landmark album now sounds the way it was meant to sound, thanks to the restoration of Perry's rare original — and, to most fans, superior — mono mix, which was later altered by Beefheart's label without the artist's involvement. Both the LP and CD version of this definitive edition feature authoritative new liner notes by Rolling Stone editor and longtime Beefheart enthusiast David Fricke."

 

Sure its relevant to the current discussion. Sundazed offers the album in 'Perry's rare original... mono mix.' The reissue just so happens to be "a" mono mix.

The big question being, of course, whether it is 'Perry's rare original' one. I love the play of words going on. I'm still trying to figure out where Katy Perry comes in though.

 

It isn't.

 

I think technically thats right. But remember....Sundazed did say restored.

 

This thread got me checking out the stereo mix... gasp... for the first time ever. Listening to the 1999 CD right now and I think it sounds fab! The separation certainly makes up for the partial lack in punchiness. I like it! Carry on.

 

I like it too, thought I was the only one. It's a psych splatter spin-paint array in dayglo stereo technicolor.

 

I like it too, thought I was the only one. It's a psych splatter spin-paint array in dayglo stereo technicolor.

 

Somebody should fold those two posts down into one. Sorry I couldn't resist.

 

I do think this statement is worded very carefully. If it was just mastering a straight mono safety copy, the statement would not include the word "restoration". In other words, although they did not broadcast how this version came about, they do tell us in the statement that it was not a straight transfer of a master tape.

Would it have been better to just be transparent, and disclose everything that was done to "restore" the "rare original...mono mix?" Yes. Did they admit in the press release that it was a restoration, and not just a mastering straight from tape? Yes

Here is my guess to what happened:

They did locate a safety master (the pictured tape box), but something (perhaps a lot of things) is wrong with it. They then "restored" it from 1. Stereo tape 2. Perhaps mono needledrop (I don't think this has been proven yet. The stereo ending to Electricity makes me think a needledrop was NOT used. This is the one difference in the mixes you can find on the internet when you do a basic search, so I find it unlikely they would miss that one, and use the stereo instead of the needledrop).

I guess we can judge how good the restoration is (I think it sounds good, with a couple of issues), and wish for more transparency. But I don't think it was a lie.

 

I still question whether "restoration" is meant to imply any such thing. Sundazed seems to use the term elsewhere simply to mean "available again". Like this:

"Our new compact disc edition restores the rare, long-missing “toilet seat” cover and features a short essay by David Fricke."

(Most releases used art that covered or cropped out the toilet)

And:

"Explosive 1967 electric blues set restored to its original mono glory."

(Most releases were of the stereo mix)

And:

"Sundazed restores the original Columbia album version of Oar directly from the 2-track master tapes, circa 1968."

(The previous CD release was a remix)

That is, they're not using the term to claim they worked some sort of magic, just that they are making things available again that had been supplanted by other versions. In the case of Beefheart, the stereo mix.

Not sure what you mean. The stereo ending was used *because* the rest was a (mono) needledrop.

 

Those are interesting quotes. You may very well be correct.

On the needledrop question:

I am saying if the intention was deception, I would use the needledrop at the end of Electricity, to avoid the tell-tale backing track under the theramin.

A basic internet search tells you to look for that particular feature in determining the true mono mix.

If deception was the plan, I would use a needledrop in that spot. The best investigators could say was "there is some distortion here that makes me think needledrop." That could not really be proven conclusively. The actual mix difference between the mono and stereo on Electricity can be proven.

So I think there are only three possibilities:

1. They wanted it to be from tape, and the one they have is damaged, so they decided to patch folded down stereo in trouble spots, knowing the slight difference on the ending of Electricity

2. They were out to be deceptive, used a mono needledrop with stereo patches, and somehow missed the part of the album that is a dead giveaway.

3. There is a "rarer" mono mix that includes this ending to Electricity, and was on the tape they used. (I find this one the least likely)

 

One would think. But it's also part of a fade, which can be problematic for a needledrop. Apparently making sure there wasn't audible surface noise took precedence over making sure the mix was correct.

Electricity comparison coming up momentarily.

 

Electricity:

The intro on the Sundazed matches the mono mix, but at 0:04 there's an edit to the stereo mix. The stereo mix has slightly different EQ and balance (which, interestingly enough, looks *really* different in spectral view), and the amp hum before the vocal comes in is less audible. There's another edit back to the mono mix at 0:12:



From here, there's some noticeable distortion not present on my friend's copy of the mono LP, which definitely points to a needledrop. At about 0:21, "SHoutS the truth peaCefully" is particularly spitty. There's not much to note for most of the song, until the ending. At 2:53 it edits back to the stereo mix. Easily heard when syncing the different versions up, but also easily heard independently. On the mono mix, the backing track quickly fades out at 2:55, leaving only the theremin (?). On the stereo mix, the backing continues through the end of the fade. In addition, the fade is a second or two longer in stereo.

 

Question: Do you think the intro of Electricity is from tape? You mentioned it matches, and then at :21 there is distortion that might indicate a needledrop. Does that mean you believe the intro is tape-sourced?

If so, it would seem to support my theory of two or three sources: Mono Tape, Stereo tape folded down, possible needledrop

 

Where There's Woman

I'm not seeing/hearing any evidence that bits of the stereo mix were spliced in. However, it does seem likely the source was a mono needledrop. There are a few edits in the Sundazed where very small chunks have been removed, presumably where there were pops; approximately 2700 samples at 1:14, for example. In addition, Sundazed "faded the fade" slightly, cutting off the last half second or so; cranking it up reveals what seems to be surface noise. It's worth noting that it would have been impossible to use the stereo mix for the fade, since the stereo mix fades about 4 seconds earlier than the mono.



(Forgot to label the files in the screenshot; Sundazed on top, mono LP on bottom)

Note how the mono LP cuts off abruptly just after 2:11, while the Sundazed starts fading at about 2:08 and ends at about 2:10.5.

And here's a sample (increased in volume for clarity):

Where's There's Woman fades

Sundazed first, mono LP second. Shorter fade on the Sundazed, and a bit of surface noise present.

Marketing/master tape claims aside, it's not a bad needledrop/cleanup. It's not *amazing*, but it's not bad either. While I'm not a fan of "fading the fade", it isn't clear why they just didn't do the same thing for the rest of the album. It certainly would have been more authentic, and people would have almost certainly noticed that less than the patchwork they did create.