CD Watchdog - The Who - MIA

A few months back I sent in an e-mail to ICE about The Who - Ultimate Collection. I received an e-mail back basically stating that they were flooded with complaints about it. I wasn't the only one who had problems with it. Yet, to date, no article has made the CD Watchdog.

Wonder if the reason is: we just can't criticize Pete's ex-brother-in-law and upset him, so they shelved it.

Who knows maybe it will appear in a leter issue.

Just wondering.

Brian

 

That's a little paranoid. I wouldn't be surprised if ICE decided to cover "The Ultimate Collection" and "My Generation" in the same issue, and it's a bit soon to cover the latter.

 

I really, really doubt that would be a consideration. If it were then times are sad. Pete doesn't seem like the guy who would get so "upset" if someone didn't enjoy his brother-in-law's (EX) work. I bet he wouldn't mind if someone was critical of his own stuff (as long as they were honest & not just being negative & bashing). I think Pete has some pretty tough skin by now...

Todd

 

Well, I am a long-time ICE reader, so I'm not bashing here, but they do seem to get a *lot* of quotes from Astley on his projects (not just Who stuff). They may be reluctant to tick off a source.

Which is a shame, since they've basically given Astley/UMG a pass on a lot of the horrific things they've done to the Who catalog. (Even more than the sound quality, the goofy remixes of "Had Enough" and "Cry If You Want" *alone* ought to be enough to get him banned from the reissue biz forever.)

Ryan

 

And Ryan I sent off a Who Watchdog e-mail a while ago and was given a response of "We've done enough Who Watchdog columns we're leaving the Who alone for a while."

Brian

 

Ryan,

I haven't read Ice in years (good magazine, I just kind of drifted away from it) but in respectful honesty, they shouldn't be "that" concerned about honest reporting hurting their contact with anyone. Good, honest criticism is always needed in an evaluation of one's work. I would be offended if everything I did was deemed "perfecto" only as a way to "keep me happy". John Astley's been around the block many times I'm sure. I don't think he would be "hurt" (maybe a little stunned or "gob-smacked" for a few moments) if there was a well justified critique that didn't see his work in a postive only manner. We all lay some stinkers sometimes (it doesn't matter what type of work anyone does). Sometimes good honest criticism is a blessing in disquise. I've done some acting jobs in my past where I've bit the big monkey and I'm glad I have some friends who are honest (sometimes too honest but it does help). Good work is an evolving process. Sometimes we need reality checks here and there. Anyway, I don't know if Ice does hold some deserved praise or punches out of concern for losing a source but a lot of the time these "sources" need the press as much as "they" need the sources. Gee, with all those hands washing each other you would think, nah, never mind...

Todd

 

Todd,

Sure, and they've run Watchdog pieces critical of Astley in the past, so I'm not suggesting Astley is "untouchable" in ICE. It's just that in those Watchdog items, they run a complaint from someone saying "Live At Leeds disc two is ruined by the mastering" and then they run a quote from Astley saying "Well, I think it's fine" and that's that.

I just wonder how often they feel it necessary to do that dance. If they were *really* going to try to figure out why every Who release gets a raft of complaints, they'd have done it by now.

Ryan

 

Read the reviews at Amazon.com. People love the sound, lots of people. As long as he gets compliments like that, he can ignore the complaints, not matter how right they may be.

 

Todd, Pete *IS* a guy who gets upset over that stuff. When lots of people thought the sound of LALE really sucked (and told him), he posted a rant about "audiophile assholes" on his website. Nice PR, eh?

As far as Astley goes, while I haven't spoken to him in a few years, I've heard that he more or less does "hate" me, since I've been so vocal about his various screw-ups.

You may not believe me, but I do feel "not upsetting people" has a lot to do with why a) ICE is never too critical of Astley, b) Astley is still able to keep working on Who releases.

 

Luke, I take your word for what you say. I know you're very on top of this stuff. As for Pete ranting like that? Come on Pete, people have different taste & opinions, deal with it. As for Jon Astley having a gripe about you for having opinions and expressing them (and presenting valid reasons to support your arguement), Good Lord man (Jon), reality is over there, tickets are available, why not get on line like the rest of us...

Todd

 

Astley didn't do those remixes.

-D

 

I wish that *someone* would do an article about how horrible The Who catalog has been butchered.

Even "non-audiophile assholes" think so.

 

David,

No, he didn't, but he was in charge of the remix/remaster program. He either requested that those mixes be made, or approved them, or didn't listen to them. In any of those three cases, IMHO the buck stops with him.

Ryan

 

Did anybody else who browses the alt.music.who newsgroup get twitchy when they read those two sentences?

It is a good point, though, Matt.

Ryan

 

Ehh...it's almost falling into his trap to blame him. He didn't do them. And it isn't like the Who's Next remixes/sound are soul-destroyingly awful; if the no-noise processing had been a bit lighter...

-D

 

Well, I think it's a bit too easy to get into that mentality. If that were the case, Pete would be more to blame than Astley, and Universal would be more to blame than Pete. They let this stuff get released, right?

There's a LOT you can blame Astley for, but poor remixes (for the most part) are not included.

 

I am glad you had the same reaction that I did. I read alt.music.who and the use of Amazon reviews as support sent chills down my spine and caused appendages to go numb for a minute.

 

That's an interesting point -- the earlier stuff (mix choices on the first Quick One aside) didn't seem to be as radically remixed as the late-seventies/early eighties stuff. Yes, there are differences on Tommy, Quad, et al, but they're somewhat more subtle than the glaring changes on WAY and It's Hard. I actually quite like the Quad remix.

Wonder why the mixes got weirder as the program went on. More tracks to play with on the multis? Less "sacred" material so they felt freer to play around?

Fair enough. I just tend to see him as the "manager" of the whole process, and I reflexively blame managers.

Ryan

 

Astley should be banned from remastering because he screwed up two Who albums-"Who Are You" & "It's Hard" by screwing up the mixes and altering them beyond recognition.

 

Once again, Astley didn't do the mixes, period. Astley screwed up a lot of things, but he didn't screw up the mixes (Andy Macpherson did).

 

Luke is correct! Astley just has this talent for grabbing wrong tapes such as Young Man Blues on Odds & Sods.

Luke, on the new A Quick One, since the new sticker is missing on the first few discs, what changes are made to the booklet, if any. I tried to buy one that was recently brought in to Best Buy from the warehouse and I got the original version.

Thanks,

Brian

 

Regardint why it got weirder as the reissue series progressed...well, I just think they kind of lost interest, and consequently decided to monkey around more.

BTW, how is It's Hard different? I've never heard the original (well, I have it on vinyl, but as I'm not too fond of this album I'd prefer to be *told*..^_^)

-D

 

I've been told there are NO changes to the packaging at all, other than the sticker.

As far as It's Hard goes, I couldn't tell you the differences (other than the centered vocal on EF), but I was listening to it a few weeks ago and was actually kind of impressed. Better than I remembered it.

 

Thank you. I'll just be patient and wait for the stickered CDs to make there way to the Little Rock stores.

Brian

 

Re: It's Hard

A lot of the fade-outs are extended, which I don't mind.

As Luke mentioned, Pete's vocal is centered on Eminence Front instead of hard right - not a huge deal but the songs loses a bit of its character.

There's been some digital echo added to several vocals -- the one that springs to mind is the end of "It's Your Turn." This is unnecessary but doesn't send me screaming for the exits.

The one that really gets my goat is "Cry If You Want." On the original, the martial drum pattern that Jones plays doesn't start until after the first time Daltrey sings "cry if you want," just as his delivery goes from gentle to harsh. On the remix, the drums start as soon as the song does, which totally ruins what was a neat moment as the song "kicked in."

Interestingly enough, the live version included as a bonus track also has the drums from the beginning. I'm don't know if that's how the song actually went live, but it seems less likely to me that they'd change the live version, so I'm assuming it did.

On the plus side, the remix lengthens the fade on "CIYW," which means more gratuitous Townshend power chords, which is always a good thing.

The sound is much better than the old WB CD, I just wish they hadn't mucked up CIYW.

Ryan