I pulled out my old Columbia CD of Dylan's JOHN WESLEY HARDING just to be sure....

What don't you like about the old Vic Anesini CD... the mix or the mastering, if I may ask? I agree the gold Mark Wilder CD is an ear bleeder.

 

Thanks for the heads up! I just ordered one from BMG, I had to waste a freebie to get it. I say that, because I use to own it!!! I sold a lot of six original Columbia CD's on e-bay when the SACD's came out. When will I learn?!?!?

 

A little bit of both I think. The SACD mix was a real eye opener for me, and I think that the clarity of the SACD is unsurpassed by the CD; just my humble opinion, of course.

 

I am happy to have picked up a mint used copy of this CD at a shoe repair store of all places and I am happy with the sound of it.

 

At a shoe repair store?

 

And it's not even sole music

 

That's why I love this forum - this is fascinating stuff. I never realized the BoB CD and Vinyl used different mixes. I haven't listened to the vinyl since I bought the CD 15 years ago.

As for JWH - one valuable lesson I've learned from this forum is that you do not simply trade your old CD's when a new version comes along.

Once I get back home I need to revisit these two albums. I haven't played either for quite some time.

 

Yes, it was a shoe repair store of all places.

 

I know Bemidji doesn't have a lot of places to buy music, but I didn't know it was that bad...

 

The original stereo mix (UK) is a nice one. I find it rawer than the 1980s CD mix, but I like it.

First thing is, it's dry as a bone. NO reverb of any sort on vocals or any instrument except for the sound of the room. Then there's the original mix to Leopard-Skin Pill-Box Hat, which doesn't have the stupid, what-were-they-thinking tinny reverbed sound to it.

And on some songs it sounds as if they'd just pulled up the faders to where they liked and rolled tape- the instruments just 'pile up' (in a good way) as they enter the song- there's no 'fader riding' (I'm thinking of the organ on 'Pledging My Time' - anyone else hear this?).

 

UPDATE:

Yes, Steve (and others) were definitely right about the original CD!

I had the original US pressing of JWH for many years before the SACDs came out. A while before I picked up the Dylan SACD box, I took most of my would-be redbook duplicates down to the used CD shop to sell off. Stooopid me!. You think, in 2004, I'd know better by now. Of course I was never happy with the SACD of this particular title, but didn't have the redbook any longer to compare to, but I KNEW the harmonica was never that piercing on the old disc.

So, today I decided to track an old copy down. Harder than you might think. All large retailers only had new hybrids or remastered redbook version. Went to 3 different shops with no used copies. Finally went to the place were I originally sold my first copy, and they had a new/sealed 'old' version for only $10. The irony was killing me the entire time I took it up to the counter to purchase

The old version has a nice, full, warm sound that is very tolerable to listen to a medium to loud volumes. Plus, like Steve mentioned, the voice has lotsa body. More so than the same tracks on the SACD mastering.

Grab this one while ya can, folks!

 

Is John Wesley Harding the only original Dylan CD that is from the 1st generation master tapes?

 

So it would appear as more and more members chime in that the original CD is the odd duck here. Both the vinyl and hybrid have vocal and harp *way* up in the mix. It's the original CD that sounds more "natural." So what happened? Was the original CD remixed?

 

Strong disagreement here regarding the vinyl. See my posts #27 and #30 above... the original vinyl is warm, round, and has great bass with a wide soundstage. No hyped up harp. I don't have the first issue cd, but it appears that (according to Steve) the first issue cd captured the sound that was on the original wax.

The SACD is the loser here...

 

But, curiously, the guy who worked on the SACD claims it's from the original master tapes. Is someone lying or what?

Is it safe, then, to say that the original vinyl and the original CD are from the same tape, but the SACD is from a different tape? If so, then this could be a case of many of you simply prefering the LP (copy?) tape, with its unique EQ, over the original master.

Or am I now hopelessly confused? (I only have this album on LP).

 

When you fold down the stereo mix, the information in the center (the vocals, bass and harmonica in this case) will be louder.

 

That's an understatement. Glancing over this thread: some people say the old CD sounds just like the vinyl, some say it sounds better. Some people say the remastered CD/SACD sounds just like the vinyl, others say it sounds nothing like it. Steve says the vinyl lacked bass and the old CD has nice bass. Berkowitz of Legacy says the vinyl had the bass severely cut and the new SACD version has substantial bass. Others say the vinyl had great bass. The only thing there is agreement on is that the old CD and the SACD version sound quite different.

 

Not quite the same thing, but the old versions of Bringing it All Back Home and Blonde on Blonde are remixes from the multi-tracks.

 

Thank you for summarizing my confusion perfectly. I guess the old CD is going on my list of things to watch for.

 

I think Steve said that the vinyl was cut many times over the years, and obviously some of us got a good one and some didn't. I lucked out, mine sounds really good, WAY better than the SACD, even with a couple of pops and clicks. Labels are red "360 Sound" and the dead wax has what looks like a "NW" scribble as well as hand written XSM -135311 1B (side 1) and XSM -135312 1B (side 2).

I also remember having a orange and white CBS label Japanese pressing from the early '80's that sounded all right, but it did sound like a copy tape. I sold it and replaced it with this better sounding original U.S. pressing.

The bottom line is, I guess, the first issue cd would probably be easier to find than the correct original U.S. lp, and it should sound as good or better than the lp.

Now, anyone care to comment on the Sundazed mono lp???

 

I reread Steve's post and you're right. If the LP was recut 30 times over the years, I guess it would be possible there are LPs that sound like both CD versions, as well as LPs that sound nothing like either of them. No wonder it's so confusing. I guess the only thing we can be sure about is that Northern Minnesota is a great place to simultaneously get your shoes repaired and get your Dylan fix.

 

Yeah, so few of us think of N. Minnesota as a Dylan/shoe repair mecca!

 

Wonder if the shoe repair stores in Hibbing also stock Dylan CDs?

 

Sorry to add to the confusion, but as Rspaight first noted, and I agree, it's not merely an EQ difference. The vocal/harp are mixed much louder in comparison to the backing on both my vinyl copies and hybrid Sony. The original CD, on the other hand, has vocals/harp mixed down, more "in line" with with backing. 30 pressings of the vinyl or not, I still don't believe that the tapes supplied pressing plants would allow the engineers there to alter the mix. EQ yes.

I don't recall reading a post here where a member has found a vinyl copy with a *mix* approximating the original CD, which remains an anomaly as compared to other issues.