New Ozzies!

I have compared the new Ozzy remasters with the remasters from 95. I definitely can say... they are better in every way!!!
I also like the new bass and drum parts...

 

Thanks for reminding me that there is a new episode of the Osbournes on tonight (in the US).
I think at 43 I am ready to buy my first Ozzie CD - which one should I get?

 

I listened to some of Blizzard Of Oz and it sounded clean and tinkered with, the new bass and drum parts inserted with tweezers and surprisingly well blended with the original parts. Nice but fake. And to hell with Ozzy and his manager wife. Without Daisley and Kerslake he'd have no album in the first place. Replacing former members contributions is selfish. Out of principle, don't buy these. Buy used copies of the earlier remasters. Imagine David Gilmour erasing Waters contributions from The Wall or DSOTM and inserting new parts from Guy Pratt. There'd be a war.

 

I played the "new" version of Diary of a Madman last night, definitely clean, and seemed to rock a bit more than the old version. To my ears, it seemed that Rhodes' guitar was brought forward more in the mix than it used to be. I haven't heard Blizzard yet.

While playing it, I was thinking about the controversy involving the removal of the bass and drums parts and substitution by new musicians. I was trying to think of other situations in which a band could remove a "weaker" contribution or otherwise eliminate a musician's contribution, like Paul Simon allegedly did with Garfunkel's contribution to Hearts and Bones or Ozzy here. The Waters example is interesting but I think his contribution was too great to try to "wipe" him off the record. Likewise, while Van Halen would probably like to reissue the Roth CDs with new vocals, vocals are for the most part the contribution to the recordings that are set in stone. However, I could easily see where Paul Stanley and Gene Simmons could go back to old Kiss records and "update" them without Peter Criss or Ace Frehley on them. Please note I'm not endorsing this practice at all, but it's an interesting academic exercise.

 

still pissed off

I used to be a fan of Ozzy. No more. Like Bill Ward says in the "Last Supper" when he turns to Ozzy...

"I hate you"

I have never been this mad at an artist in my life. I was only moderately pissed at Frank Zappa for what he did to his CDs.

Gotta shut up. Blood pressure rising...

 

I never cared much for Ozzy to begin with but this is a terrible thing to do in the name of cash! What if George, Ringo & John under management of Klein decided that "Let It Be" would be more profitable without the Paul vocal track? I know it's a stretch!

I won't comment on the Osborne's MTV show. I might piss someone off.

 

But it doesn't appear that the original parts were wiped because of their musical "weakness." Sharon's comments on ozzy.com (which were removed A DAY after they were posted) point to this decision being essentially revenge for the lawsuits Daisley and Kerslake had against them. Also, don't the 'new' parts match the old parts pretty closely?

I'm still pissed about this whole thing.

 

You gotta hand it to him..He knows how to survive the times. Still the "King"at his kraft...How many "like" bands can say that...

 

Definitely appears that Sharon Osbourne admitted to the change being personally motivated. There was no attempt here to sonically improve the recordings! Besides, this is simply altering history...how sad and pathetic Ozzy is becoming.

How many of you enjoy that show?? After I got over the initial "craziness" of the family, I started to get annoyed by all of the "playing to the camera" behavior, and it became TIRED very quickly. I watched, perhaps, the first 3 episodes. In addition, it's obviously not a bona fide "Ozzy at home" documentary. I guarantee you it was planned out as a sitcom, and MUCH of the footage is set-up ahead of time.

The one daughter seems to be the smartest one in the family--she opted NOT to be in the show!

 

I haven't heard the new releases yet. In my opinion those recordings needed a remixing. If one likes the old versions they are still available. I think it is good to give the consumer more options. Besides the new releases are only $11.49 at cd now.

 

Would you mind clarifying what you mean by "inserted with tweezers"? The original drum and bass parts were also on separate tracks - were these also inserted with tweezers? And isn't it really called "mixing"? Also, what do you mean by "fake"? A little more info on what you are hearing please.

I think the new remasters are superior to the old versions. They took a hack rhythm section and replaced them with a very talented rhythm section and did a fine job. I recommend the new over the old.

 

Mike, are the new parts essentially the same as the old? I'm curious. I refuse to buy these, but I did listen to the samples at CDNow.

While we're at it, I say we wipe Michael Anthony and Alex Van Halen off the VH albums. I opt for Billy Sheehan and maybe Dave Lombardo as replacements.

 

No... Mike B. played some different styles... some special effects!

 

I hear what you're saying. But for me, if you had asked me last year: "What albums are ruined by the horrible sounding rhythm section?". I would have replied, "I loathe Lee Kerslake!". So that's why I'm happy with these new versions.

As far as the parts, they are essentially exactly the same. They just sound, well, better! You are probably familiar with Mike Bordin's work - he is truly one of the modern greats in my book. However, there are certain drum parts, where I say: Hey, where did that go? But there are only a couple of those.

Although, Michael Anthony and Alex Van Halen would probably not be considered "great players", I can't say I have been actively annoyed by what I hear from the VH rhythm section. Well, not that much anyway.

 

I should also add that the Mike Bordin sound was essentially "defanged" on these remasters. I would assume to make the drum sound fit properly with the other material. However, some of that power still shines through. I recommend Faith No More's "Angel Dust" for some full on Mike Bordin stuff.

 

Lee Kerslake was a very poor drummer and Bob Daisley completely overrated!!! Good enuff for a highschool band, but not in the same league as Randy Rhoads!

 

Kenny Jones didn't really fit the sound of The Who. Zak Starkey should go back and re-record all of the drum parts for Face Dances and It's Hard.

David Lee Roth just didn't work out in Van Halen, so somebody should go and re-record all of those vocals. Especially on Jump.

The backing tracks on Fresh Cream are kind of compressed and thin sounding. Those guys should go back in the studio and re-record them. They would sound better.

 

I read somewhere that Paul McCartney re-did some of Ringo's drum parts after he left the Studio.

 

Any chance someone could post to the net an MP3 of the new Crazy Train or something? I'd like a more concrete comparison than the CDNow clips?

-D

 

Second the request for a few mp3s. How about "Little Dolls"? I can't see them getting that intro sounding right.

Also, word is they redid the count-in to "No Bone Movies"?

 

This may be true...only Paul & Ringo knows...but I bet he didn't do it after he had already committed the final mix for release.

 

Have you ever heard the Uriah Heep stuff? And how is Daisley overrated? Has that big legion of Widowmaker fans been comparing him to Tony Levin? Speaking of overrated, does Ozzy actually have any talent other than getting drunk? I was a Sabbath fan, but really, where is Ozzy without an Iommi, Rhoads or Wylde?

I listened to more of the newly remastered "Blizzard" and it sucks dog feces. The original LP version is open and musically cohesive. These new tracks sound so sonically disjointed from the guitar and vocal tracks it's laughable. It sounds flat and lifeless. Obviously, the new rhythm tracks sound "cleaner", so the other stuff was EQ'd to match it and it sounds like one awful digitally concocted mess, musically and sonically. And totally pointless, since the new tracks just ape the old. Way to go Ozzy!

 

Beagle, you left off Jake E. Lee.

 

I have heard and seen Bob Daisley a lot of times... with Black Sabbath, Rainbow and Ozzy Osbourne!!! You can find a lot of better bassplayers in L.A. or somewhere else!!! Steve Harris powerful bassplaying blows him away!!! Or take Stu Hamm, Geddy Lee... very good bassplayers in rock music!

Lee Kerslake... (I have the most Heep records, and I love the most stuff of them... Look At Yourself, Demons, Magician's Birthday, Sweet Freedom)... but Tommy Aldridge and Randy Castillo (died from cancer this year) were better in every way!

I'm sorry, I can't agree with you about Daisley/Kerslake... the sound of the new reissues is another theme...

Claus

 

Geddy Lee, LOL! So are you trying to say that you would replace a cohesive rock and roll chemistry rhythm sections bed tracks with some session hacks who are technically impeccable or some bass player who sounded great on another recording at another time? Most classic rock and roll records are the result of average or below average musicians who locked together and produced something magical. It's all about chemistry, it's not paint by numbers.